/  /  ,  / '/ ,  J.  ^- 


3Frum  \\\t  Cibrarg  of 

Pr0fr000r  Irnjamtn  Srrrkiitrtbgp  BlarftplJi 

Hrqupatl^p^  bg  l?tm  tn 

tl|p  ICibrarg  of 

^rtnreton  Qllipobgtral  ^^mtttar^ 

BS  2361  .F37  1882    ,  ' 
Farrar,  Frederic  William, 
1831-1903. 
le  early  days  of 


Th( 


Christianity 


THE 


EARLY  DAYS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


THE    EARLY    DAYS 
CHRISTIANITY. 


F.    w/fARRAR,    D.D.,    F.R.S 

LATE   FELLOW   OP   TRINITY   COLLEGE,    CAMBRIDGE  ; 

CANON   OP  WESTMINSTER  ; 

AND   CHAPLAIN    IN    ORDINARY   TO   THE   IJUEEN. 


VOL.    IL 


CASSELL,    PETTER,    GALPIN   A:    CO., 

NEW  YORK,  LONDON  d-  PARIS. 


E.    P.    BUTTON    At    CO., 

NEW  YORK. 


r 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


IBoofe  IV.   [continued). 
JUDAIC   CHRISTIANITY. 

CHAPTER  XXI. 
Characteristics  of  the  Epistle  of  St.  James. 

PAGE 

Canonicity  of  St.  James — Judaic  Tone  of  Thought — Ahsence  of  Dis- 
tinctively Christian  Dogmas — Luther's  Rash  Assertion — Ideal  of  St. 
James — Readers  whom  he  had  in  View — Date  of  the  Epistle — "V\Tiere 
Written — Phenomena  of  the  Epistle  Explained  by  its  Palestinian 
Origin — State  of  the  Jewish  Church  at  Jerusalem — Tyrannous  Sad- 
ducean  Priests — Maledictions  against  them  in  the  Talmud — Their 
Greed  and  Luxury — St.  James  in  Writing  to  Christians  was  Thinking 
partly  of  Jews — And  his  Words  would  he  Respected  by  Jews  as  well  as 
Christians — ^Asserted  Essenism  and  Ebionism  of  St.  James — Orphic 
Colouring — Style  of  St.  James — Outline  of  the  Epistle — Its  one  Pre- 
dominant Thought — Controversial  Aspect — Parties  in  the  Chi-istian 
Church — A  Last  Appeal  to  Jews — Uniqueness  of  the  Epistle — Its 
Usefulness  and  Grandeur       .........       1 

CHAPTER  XXII. 

The  Epistle  op  St.  James. 

The  Title  which  he  Adopts— The  Dispersion — The  Greeting — Translation 
and  Notes — Temptation  and  Trial— Need  of  Wisdom — Need  of  Prayer 
— Address  to  Rich  and  Poor — Meaning  of  the  Words  addressed  to  them 
— Trantiitoriness  of  Riches — Blessing  of  Endurance — God  alwaj's  in  the 
Meridian — A  Pregnant  Clause — The  True  Ritual — ^Respect  of  Persons 
— Justification  by  Works — Translation  and  Notes — Oracular  Egotism 
— Sins  of  the  Tongue — Heavenly  Wisdom — Translation  and  Notes — 
State  of  the  Christian  Communities — St.  James  is  Thinking  of  Jeru- 
salem— False  Religionism — "  The  Spirit  that  Dwelleth  in  us  Lusteth 
to  Envy  " — Various  Exhortations — Overconfidence — Denunciation  of 
Greed — Of  Whom    is    he  Thinking  ? — Sadducean    Hierarchs  —  The 


T  CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

Impending  Doom  —  The  Murder  of  the  "Just  One "  — Despised 
Warnings — Last  Exhortations — Efficacy  of  Prayer — Perversion  of  the 
Passage — A  Last  Exhortation •'53 

CHATTER  XXni. 

St.  James  and  St.  Paul  on  Faith  and  Works. 

St.  Paul  and  St.  James  Contrasted — Is  there  a  Real  Contradiction  ? — Views 
of  the  Tiibingon  School — Is  St.  James  thinking  of  St.  Paul  at  aU  ? — 
The  (iucstions  often  Discussed — Jewish  Reliance  on  the  Benefit  of 
Theoretic  Monotheism — On  Circumcision — On  National  Privileges — On 
Extemalism  Generally — St.  James  probably  Intended  to  Correct  Per- 
versions of  Pauline  Teaching — St.  Paul's  Views  Misrepresented  even  in 
his  Lifetime,  and  still  often  Perverted — No  Intention  to  Refute  St. 
Paul — Is  the  Language  of  the  Apostles  EeconciLable  ? — They  are  using 
the  same  Words  in  Different  Senses—"  Faith"  in  St.  Paul  and  in  St. 
James— " Works "  in  St.  Paul  and  in  St.  James — "Justification"  in 
St.  Paul  and  in  St.  James — Illustrations  drawn  from  different  Periods 
in  the  Life  of  Abraham — St.  Paul  was  Dealing  with  the  Vanity  of 
Legalism,  St.  James  with  the  Vanity  of  Orthodoxy — Fundamental 
Agreement  between  the  two  Apostles  shown  by  what  they  say  of  Faith 
and  of  Works  in  other  Passages — No  Bitter  Controversy  between  them 
— They  used  Different  Expressions,  and  looked  on  Christianity  from 
Different  Points  of  View — What  Both  would  have  Accepted — Blessing 
of  Truth  revealed  under  Many  Lights  .  .  .75 


13oofe  V. 
THE  EARLIER  LIFE  AND  WORKS  OF  ST.  JOHN. 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 

St.  John. 

The  Pillar-Apostlos — Individuality  of  Each — St.  Paul  Meets  them  at  Jeru- 
salem— The  Special  Work  of  St.  John— His  Growth  in  Spiritual 
Enlightenment — Continuity  of  his  Godliness — His  Boyhood — A  Dis- 
ciple of  the  Baptist — His  Natural  Gifts — Independence  of  Galileans — 
Messianic  Hopes — Becomes  a  Disciple  of  Jesus — Why  St.  Jolm  Lived 
at  Jerusalem — Teaching  of  the  Baptist — Was  St.  John  Married  ? — 
"Follow  Mo" — Belonged  to  the  Inneimost  Group  of  Apostles — Not 
Ideally  Faultless— Ho  had  Much  to  Unlearn— His  Exclusiveness— His 
Intolerance  at  En  Gannim— Mixture  of  Hiunane  Motives  with  his  Zeal 


CONTENTS.  vii 

PAGE 

— "As  Elias  did" — "Ye  Know  not  what  Spirit  ye  are  of" — Christ's  Last 
Journey  to  Jerusalem — Ambition  of  the  Sons  of  Zebedee — The  Cup  and 
the  Baptism — Leaning  on  the  Lord's  Bosom— Flight  at  Gethsemane — 
The  Earliest  to  Eejoin  his  Lord — In  the  High  Priest's  Palace — A 
"Witness  of  the  Trials — A  Witness  of  the  Qrucifixion — "  Behold  thy 
Mother  !  " — "  To  his  own  Home  " — Blood  and  Water — At  the  Tomb — 
A  Witness  of  the  Resurrection — On  the  Lake  of  GaHlee — "  If  I  Will 
that  he  Tarry  till  I  Come  " — Mistaken  Interpretation  of  the  Words     .  103 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

Life  of  St.  John  after  the  Ascension. 

In  the  Upper  Room — Healing  of  the  Cripple — Threatened  and  Scourged — 
With  Peter  in  Samaria — Years  of  Contemplation — Once  Mentioned  by 
St.  Paul — At  the  Synod  of  Jerusalem — A  Judaist — Recognised  the 
Mission  of  St.  Paul — Took  no  Part  in  the  Debate — No  further  Records 
of  him  in  Scripture — At  Patmos — Date  of  this  Banishment — Causes 
which  led  to  his  Departure  from  Jerusalem — Legends  of  his  Banishment 
to  Patmos — The  Boiling  Oil  and  the  Poison — Was  he  ever  at  Rome  ? — 
Certainty  that  he  Resided  in  Asia  Minor — "  The  Nebulous  Presbyter  " 
— John  the  Presbyter  was  John  the  Apostle — The  Quartodeciman  Con- 
troversy—Greek of  the  Apocaljrpse — Revealing  EfEect  of  the  Fall  of 
Jerusalem — The  Apocalypse  Judaic  in  Tone — St.  John  at  Ephesus — 
Patmos 136 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

Legends  of  St.  John. 

Legend  of  his  Meeting  Cerinthus  at  the  Thermse — Reasons  for  believing 
the  Story  to  be  a  mere  Invention — Spirit  of  Religious  Intolerance  in 
which  the  Story  Originated — Strange  Legend  about  the  Messianic 
Grapes — Credulity  of  Papias^Possible  Explanation  of  the  Story — 
Error  of  Irena3us — Vehemence  of  Polycarp — Legend  of  St.  John  and 
the  Robber — Legend  of  St.  John  and  the  Tame  Partridge — Tenderness 
to  Animals — St.  John  and  the  Petalon — Other  Legends — St.  John's 
Last  Sermons — Legends  of  the  Death  of  St.  John — Legends  of  his 
Immortality  ...  .........   161 

CHAPTER  XXVII. 

General  Features  of  the  Apocalypse. 

The  Earliest  of  St.  John's  Books — AVhat  we  Lose  by  the  Unchronological 
Arrangement  of  the  Book — The  Apocalypse  Written  before  the  Fall  of 
Jerusalem — Impossibility  that  it  should  have  been  Written  after 
the  Gospel 179 


CONTENTS. 


SECTION    I. 

DATE   OF   THE    APOCALYPSE.  p^^j^. 

Tlif  Apocnlj-psc  could  Not  have  been  Written  in  the  Time  of  Domitian — 
Possible  Causes  of  the  Error  of  IrcnaMis — Key  to  the  Apocalypse 
found  in  the  Neronian  Persecution — Why  the  Book  has  been  so 
priovonsly  Misunderstood — Theological  Romances  of  Commentary— 
The  Neronian  Persecution  and  the  Jewish  War  —  I^esson  of  the 
Apocah-pse — Nero  the  Antichrist — Nero  amid  the  Ashes  of  Rome — All 
Apocalypses  deal  with  Events  on  the  Contemporary  Horizon — Outbreak 
of  the  Jewish  War— The  Temple  still  Standing— The  Flight  of  the 
Christians  to  Pella— The  Date  of  the  Apocalypse  Implied  in  Kev.  xiii. 
3,  and  x\'ii.  10,  11— Written  in  the  Reign  of  Galba— Or  possibly  a 
little  Later— The  Woes  of  the  Messiah— The  Doom  of  Rome         .         .184 

SECTION   II. 

THE     BEVOLT    OF    JUD.EA. 

Delinquencies  of  Pilate — Threatening  Symptoms— Hatred  of  the  Jews  for 
the  Romans — The  Air  Full  of  Prodigies — Wickedness  of  Gessius 
Florus — Insolence  of  the  Greeks  at  Ca?sarea — Disgraceful  Tj-ranny  of 
yionis — The  Jews  Appeal  to  Cestius  Gallus — Rise  of  the  Zealots — 
Seizure  of  the  Tower  of  Antonia — Epidemic  of  Massacre — March  of 
Cestius  Gallus — His  Pusillanimity — His  Defeat  at  Bethhoron — Ves- 
pasian Despatched  to  Jud.-ea — Leading  Citizens  Involved  in  the  Revolt 
— Josephus  in  Galilee — Siege  of  Jotapata — Massacres — Siege  of  Gamala 
— ISIount  Tabor — Giscala — Atrocities  of  the  Zealots  in  Jerusalem — The 
Idumeans  Admitted — Horrible  Orgies — Advance  of  Vespasian  Marked 
by  fresh  JIassacres — A  River  of  Blood — Increasing  Horrors — Factions 
in  Jerusalem — Dreadful  Condition  of  the  City — Aspect  of  the  World — 
Physically — ilorally —  Socially —  Politically — Incessant  Civil  Wars — 
GcJieral  Terror  —  The  Era  of  Martyrdoms  —  Style,  Metaphors,  and 
Meaning  of  the  Apocalypse — Dislike  felt  for  the  Book — Accounted  for 
by  the  Perversions  to  which  it  has  been  Subjected — Strange  Systems  of 
Interpretation — The  Pra^terists — The  Futurists — The  Historical  Inter- 
preters—  Gleams  of  Tradition  as  to  the  True  View  of  the  Book — 
Increasing  Conviction  that  it  Dealt  with  Events  mainly  Contemporarj' 
—  Multitudes  of  Fantastic  Guesses — Their  Extreme  Diversity  — 
Essential  Sacredness  of  the  Book — Apocalyptic  Literature — Necessity 
for  its  Cryptographic  Form 19.*^ 

CmVPTER  XXVIII. 

The   Apocalypse. 

St.  John  "the  Theologian" 238 

SECTION  I. 

THE    LETTF.nS   TO   THE    SKVKS    CIll'RCHES. 

( )nly  a  Rapid  Outline  of  the  Apocalypse  offered — Sections  of  the  Book — 


CONTENTS.  ix 

PAGE 

The  Seven  Churches — The  Letters  Normally  Sevenfold — The  Letter  to 
Ephesus,  &c. — The  Heresies  alluded  to — Theory  that  they  are  Aimed 
at  the  Followers  of  St.  Paul — Absurdity  of  the  Theory — The  Nico- 
laitans — "  The  Depths  of  Satan  " — "  The  False  Apostles  " — Volkmar — 
The  Tiibingen  School — Extravagant  Opinions 239 

SECTION    II. 

THE   SEALS. 

The  Vision— The  First  Seal— The  White  Horse  :  The  Messiah— The  Second 
Seal— The  Red  Horse  :  Slaughter— The  Third  Seal— The  Black  Horse  : 
Famine— "The  Oil  and  the  Wine"— The  Fourth  Seal— The  Livid 
Horse  :  Pestilence — The  Fifth  Seal — The  Cry  for  Vengeance — The 
Sixth  Seal — Universal  Catastrophe — Apocalyptic  Style — The  Pause — 
The  Sealing  of  the  14-1,000 — Symbols  Iterative  and  Pi'Ogressive    .         .  248 


SECTION     III. 

THE   TRUMPETS. 

The  Censer  Hurled  to  Earth — The  First  Trumpet — Storms,  Earthquakes, 
Portents — The  Second  Trumpet — The  Burning  Moxintain  and  the  Sea 
Turned  into  Blood— The  Third  Trumpet— The  Star  Absinth— The 
Fourth  Trumpet — The  Smiting  of  Sun,  Moon,  and  Stars — The  Eagle 
screaming  "Woe!"— The  Fifth  Trumpet— The  FaUen  Star— The 
Scorpion-Locusts  —  The  Sixth  Trumpet  — •  Two  Hundred  Million 
Horsemen      ............  260 


SECTION      IV. 

AN    EPISODE. 

The  SunJike  Angel — The  Seven  Thunders — The  Book — The  Measuring — 
Character  of  the  Symbols — The  Two  Witnesses — The  Earthquake — 
Difficulties  of  Interpretation — Remarks  on  these  Visions       .         .         .  270 


SECTION    V. 

TIIK    WILD   BEAST   FROM   THE   SEA. 

The  Star-Crowned  Woman ;  the  Child ;  the  Dragon — Meaning  of  the 
Symbols— Flight  of  the  Church  to  Bella- Certainty  that  by  the  Wild 
Beast  from  the  Sea  is  mainly  meant  the  Emperor  Xero — The  Sixteen 
Distinctive  Indications — Everj'  one  of  them  Points  Directly  to  Nero 
and  the  Roman  Empire — Especially  in  those  Particulars  which  seem 
most  Enigmatical — Widespread  Belief  among  Chi-istians  that  Nero 
would  Return — The  Number  of  the  Beast — Sole  Element  of  Difficulty 
in  it — Ancient  Guesses — Its  Kabbalistic  Character  — Its  Certain 
Solution — Commonness  of  these  Isopscphic  Enig-mas — The  Solution 
Confirmed  by  the  Ancient  Various  Reading — The  Belief  about  JVero 
Eedivivus — A  priori  Dogmas — Domitian  was  a  J\ero  Eedivivm 


CONTENTS. 


SECTION    VI. 

THE   SECOND   BEABT   AND   THE    KAL8E    PKOrllET.  PAOE 

Absence  of  Definite  Traditions — Ten  Indic<ation8  as  to  the  Person  Intended 
— Idle  Guesses — Various  Conjectures — The  Roman  Augurial  System — 
Simon  Jlagus  —  Probability  that  Vespasian  was  Intended  —  Re- 
markable Adaptation  to  him  of  every  one  of  the  Ten  Indications,  even 
in  the  most  unexpected  Particulars — Possibility  that  it  is  a  Composite 
Symbol — Nero  and  Domitian — The  Name  "  Nero "  often  given  to 
Domitian        ............  301 


SECTION   VII. 

THE   VIALS. 

The  Remainder  of  the  Apocalypse — The  Vials — The  Seventh  Vial — 
Judgment  of  the  Harlot  City — Pa3an  over  the  Fall  of  Babylon — 
General  Conception  of  the  Apocalypse 311 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 

The  Fall  of  Jerusalem. 

Sources  of  the  History — Advance  of  Titus — Rage  and  Despair  of  the  Jews 
— Destruction  of  the  Temple — Massacre  and  Devastation — A  Second 
Advent — Close  of  the  ^on — Tremendous  Significance  of  the  Event  — 
Rightly  Apprehended  by  Ancient  Christian  Historians — Effects  of  the 
Event  on  the  Mind  of  St.  John — How  he  came  to  Write  the  Apocalj^se 
— Resemblances  and  Differences  of  the  Apocalypse  and  the  Fourth 
Gospel  .............   323 

CHAPTER  XXX. 

The  Growth  of  Heresy. 

The  Growth  of  Heresy  Gradual — Original  Meaning  of  the  Word — Real 
and  Imaginary  Heretics — Sources  of  Heresy — Sects — Jewish  Sects — 
Strange  Vitality  of  Judaism  —  Rabbinism — ^A  Nomocracj''  —  Jewish 
Sects — Nazarenes — Ebionites — Gentile  Sects — Simon  Magus — Legends 
of  him — An  Antichrist — Cerinthus  —  His  Errors  —  Gradual  Rise  of 
Docetism — Gnostic  Systems — Gnostics  before  Gnosticism — Opposite 
Tendencies — How  St.  John  met  Heresy 326 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 

Later  Writings  of  St.  John. 

The  First  Epistle  of  St.  John — Christianity  had  Entered  on  a  New  Phase — 
Speculations  and  Errors — St.  John's  Method  of  Argument — The  In- 
camation  of  the  Divine — Tradition  about  the  Gospel — The  Last  of  the 


CONTENTS.  xi 

PAGE 

Apostles — A  New  Era — Supreme  Utterances — Righteousness,  SonsHp, 
Sanctification 354 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 
The  Stamp  of  Finality  on  the  Writings  of  St.  John. 

St.  John  sets  the  Seal  to  Former  Revelations — Stamp  of  Finality  upon  his 
Writings— The  Idea  of  Eternity— The  Logos — "  God  is  Righteous  " — 
"  God  is  Light  " — "  God  is  Love  " — Importance  of  these  Utterances — 
Simplification  of  Essential  Elements — St.  Paul  and  St.  John — The 
Gospel— The  Epistle— Where  Written— Tradition— Tone  of  the  Epistle 
— Dangers  which  St.  John  Contemplates — Calm  of  the  Style         .         .  364 

CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

Characteristics  of  the  Mind  and  Style  of  St.  John. 

His  Contemplativeness — His  Repose  —  His  Style — His  Sternness — How 
Accounted  for — The  Personal  Question — Ideas  of  Righteousness  and 
Love      .............  382 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

Object  and  Outline  of  the  First  Epistle. 

Object  of  the  Epistle — Not  Aphoristic — First  Attempts  at  Analysis — Full 
Analysis  of  the  Epistle,  showing  its  Remarkable  Symmetry — Illustrates 
the  Characteristics  of  his  Methods — Prevalent  Triplicity  of  Arrange- 
ment— Certain  Genuineness  of  the  Epistle — An  Epistle  not  a  Treatise  .  392 

CHAPTER  XXXV. 
The  First  Epistle  of  St.  John. 

s  e  ction     I. 

ETERNAL   LIFE. 

Translation  and  Notes — Introductory  Theme — An  Apparent  Contradiction 
— "  God  is  Light  " — Meaning  of  the  Phrase — "  Walking  in  Light" — 
Translation,  Notes,  Comments  —  Propitiation  —  Prevalent  Misunder- 
standings as  to  the  Style  and  Manner  of  St.  John — Symmetries  of 
Statement — Parallels — "Knowing  God"- — Love — "Abiding  in  God" 
— The  New  and  Old  Commandment — In  what  sense  "  New "  and 
"Old"— The  Ideal  and  the  Actual— A  Test  of  Professions— "  Little 
Children,  Fathers,  Young  Men  " — Meaning  of  the  Passage — Warning 
against  Love  of  the  World — What  is  Meant  by  "  Anticlirist " — Pre- 
valence of  Antichrists — The  Unction  from  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the 
Christian's  Security — Abiding  in  the  Truth — Eternal  Life     .         .         .402 


xii  CONTENTS. 

SECTION   II. 

THE   CONFIDENCE   OF   SONSHIP. 

PAGE 

Confidence  of  Sonship  a  Sign  that  we  Possess  Eternal  Life — The  "  Mani- 
festation "  of  Chi-ist — "Children  of  God" — IIow  it  will  be  Tested — 
Translation  and  Notes — Awful  Conceptions  of  Sin — Severity  of  Lan- 
guage— Doing  Righteousness — Love  to  Man  the  Purpose  of  llevelation 
— Cain — Christ — I'orfcct  Love — Difficult  Recapitulation — Self-condem- 
nation— God's  Judgments — Confidence  towards  God — Last  Discourses 
of  Christ 430 

SECTION  III. 

THE   SOURCE  OF  SONSHIP. 

"Abide  in  Him" — Denial  of  Christ — "Testing  the  Spirits" — Confessing 
"Christ  come  in  the  Flesh" — Interesting  Variation  of  Reading — 
"What  is  Meant  by  "  Seveiing  Jesus  " — Argument  for  the  Genuineness 
of  the  Reading — The  Recognition  of  God — "  God  is  Love  " — Summary 
and  Gathering  up  of  the  leading  Conceptions 444 

SECTION     IV. 

ASSURANCE. 

The  "Witnesses — Si^urious  Verse — The  Water  and  the  Blood — Sevenfold 
Witnesses  in  the  Gospel — Witnesses  in  the  Epistle — No  Direct  Allusion 
to  the  Sacraments — Distinct  Reference  to  the  Crucifixion — Meaning  of 
the  Passage — Confirmation  of  the  Di\ane  Testimony      ....  456 

SECTION      V. 

CONCLUSIOX. 

Recapitulation — Aim  of  the  Epistle — Prayer — "  The  Sin  unto  Death  " — 
No  One  Definite  Sin — Desperate  Apostasy — The  Prayer  Not  Forbidden 
— Parallels  in  the  Old  Testament — "  Delivering  to  Satan  " — The  Limi- 
tation belongs  to  the  Realm  of  the  Idi^al— Rabbi  Meier — Praj-er  for  all 
Men — Conclusion  of  the  Epistle — "  Little  Children,  keep  yourselves 
from  Idols  " 466 

CHAPTER  XXXVI. 
The  Second  Epistle  of  St.  John. 

Brief  Christian  Epistles— Probability  of  their  Genuineness — External 
Evidence — Internal  Evidence — John  the  Elder — To  Whom  was  the 
Second  Epistle  Addressed — Electa? — Kyria  ? — A  Lady  or  a  Church? — 
Theory  of  Bishop  AVordsworth — Founded  on  very  Uncertain  Hj-pothesia 
— Theories  of  German  Critics — Fantastic  and  I'^ntenable — Improbability 
of  the  Letter  being  Addressed  to  a  Church — The  Address  better  under- 
stood in  its  Simplest  Sense— Where  the  Letter  was  Written — Analysis 


CONTENTS.  xiii 

PAGE 

— Translation  and  Notes — KejTiotes  of  the  Letter — Wrong  Use  made 
of  One  Passage — Sin  of  Dogmatic  Intolerance — Hatred  can  never  be  a 
Christian  Virtue — What  St.  John  really  Meant 481 


CHAPTER  XXXVII. 

The  Third  Epistle  of  St.  John. 

Gaius — Commonness  of  the  Name — Object  of  the  Letter — Translation  and 

Notes — Filioli,  diligite  alterutriim  ........  505 


APPENDIX. 

Excursus  I. — Asserted  Primacy  of  St.  Peter 511 

Excursus  II. — Patristic  Evidence  of  St.  Peter's  Visit  to  Eome    .         .         .512 

Excursus  III. — Use  of  the  Name  "  Babylon"  for  Eome  in  1  Pet.  v.  13      .  514 

Excursus  IV.— The  Book  of  Enoch 517 

Excursus  V. — Kabbinic  Allusions  in  St.  Jude 520 

Excursus  VI. — Specimens  of  Philonian  AUegory       .....  524 

Excursus  VII. — Additional  Illustrations  of  PMlo's  Views  about  the  Logos  526 

Excursus  VIII. — Patristic  Evidence  as  to  the  Authorship  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews ............  528 

Excursus  IX. — Minor  Resemblances  between  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 

and  the  Works  of  Philo 541 

Excursus  X. — "  Salem  "  and  Jerusalem     .......  543 

Excursus  XL — The  Altar  of  Incense  and  the  Holiest  Place        .         .         .  545 

Excursus  XII. — Ceremonies  of  the  Day  of  Atonement       ....  547 

Excursus  XIII. — Impressions  left  on  the  Minds  of  the  Jews  by  the  Cere- 
monies of  the  Day  of  Atonement  .         . 549 

Excursus  XIV. — The  Identity  of  "John  the  Presbyter"  with  "  John  the 

Apostle" 553 


Book  m. 

{continued). 

JUDAIC     CHRISTIANITY. 


THE 

Early  Days  of  Christianity. 

^  0  0  fe    $  "fcJ*     [continued) . 
JUDAIC      CHRISTIANITY. 


CHAPTER    XXI. 

CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE  EPISTLE  OF  ST.  JAMES. 

Viveade  Se  irojTjTal  Koyov. — Ja.  i.  22. 

Of  tlie  canonicity  of  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  there  can 
hardly  be  a  reasonable  doubt,  and  there  is  strong  ground 
for  believing  it  to  be  authentic.  It  is  true  that  Origen 
is  the  first  who  ascribes  it  to  St.  James,  and  he  only 
speaks  of  it  as  an  Epistle  ''  currently  attributed  to 
him."  ^  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  though  he  wrote  on  the 
Catholic  Epistles,  does  not  appear  to  have  known  it.^ 
Tertullian,  from  his  silence,  seems  either  not  to  have 
known  it,  or  not  to  have  accepted  it  as  genuine.  It 
is  not  mentioned  in  the  Muratorian  Fragment.  It  is  a 
curious  fact  that  even  in  the  pseudo-Clementines  it  is 
not  directly  appealed  to.  It  is  classed  by  Eusebius  among 
the  Antilegomena,^  but  he  seems  himself  to  have  accepted 

^  Orig.  in  Joann.  xix.  If  we  could  trust  the  translation  of  Rufinus 
{e.g.,  Horn,  in  Gen.  xxvi.  18),  in  other  parts  of  his  commentaries  he  spoko 
of  it  as  St.  James's,  and  even  called  it  "  the  Divine  Epistle." 

2  Cassiodorus  says  that  he  wrote  upon  it,  but  "  Jude  "  ought  to  be  read 
for  James  (see  Westcott  On  the  Canon,  p.  353).  Eusebius  only  says  that 
Clemens  in  his  Outlines  commented  even  on  disputed  books  :  "I  mean 
the  Epistle  of  Jude,  and  the  rest  of  the  Catholic  Epistles,  and  that  of 
Barnabas,  &c."  '  yodeverat  (Euscb.  ii.  23). 

d 


/ 


2  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

it.  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  rejected  it.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  can  be  little  doubt,  from  the  occurrence  of 
parallels  to  its  phraseology,  that  it  was  favourably  known 
to  Clemens  of  Home,  Hermas,  Trena^us,  and  Hippolytus. 
Jerome  vindicated  its  genuineness  against  the  opinion 
that  it  was  forged  in  the  name  of  James. ^  It  is  quoted 
by  Dionysius  of  Alexandria ;  and  it  has  the  important 
"evidence  of  the  ]?£fihito  in  its  favour.  Thus,  the  Syrian 
Church  received  it  early,  though  it  was  not  till  the 
fourth  century  that  it  was  generally  accepted  by  the 
Greek  and  Latin  Churches.  Nor  was  it  till  a.d.  397 
that  the  Council  of  Carthage  placed  it  in  the  Canon.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Jewish-Christian  tendencies  of  the 
Epistle,  and  what  have  been  called  its  Ebionising 
opinions,  agree  so  thoroughly  with  all  that  we  know  of 
James  and  the  Church  of  Jerusalem,  that  they  form  a 
very  powerful  argument  from  internal  evidence  in  favour 
of  its  being  a  genuine  work  of  the  "  Bishop  "  of  Jeru- 
salem. Suspicion  has  been  thrown  on  it  because  of  the 
good  Greek  in  which  it  is  written,  and  because  of  the  ab- 
sence of  the  essential  doctrines  of  Christianity."  On  the 
first  difficulty  I  shall  touch  later.  The  second  is  rather 
a  proof  that  the  letter  is  authentic,  because  otherwise, 
on  this  ground,  and  on  the  ground  of  its  apparent  con- 
tradiction of  St.  Paul,  it  would  never  have  conquered 
the  dogmatic  prejudices  which  were  an  obstacle  to  its 
acceptance.  The  single  fact  that  it  was  known  to  St. 
Peter,  and  had  exercised  a  deep  influence  upon  him,  is 
enough  to  outweigh  any  deficiency  of  external  evidence.^ 
In  this  Epistle,  then,  St.  James  has  left  us  a  precious 

'  De  Virr.  Illustr.  2.      It  must,  however,  be  admitted  that  Jerome's 
remark  is  somewhat  vacillating. 

*  See  Davidson's  Introd.  i.  303.  '  See  supra,  vol.  i.  p.  129. 


JEWISH   CHRISTIANITY.  3 

heritage  of  his  thoughts,  a  precious  manual  of  all  that 
was  purest  and  loftiest  in  Jewish  Christianity.  Having 
passed  into  the  Church  through  the  portals  of  the 
Synagogue,  and  having  exulted  in  joyous  obedience  to  a 
glorious  Law,^  the  Hebraists  could  not  believe  with 
St.  Paul  that  the  Institutions  of  Sinai  had  fulfilled  no 
loftier  function  than  that  of  bringing  home  to  the 
human  heart  the  latent  consciousness  of  sin.  They 
thought  that  the  abrogation  of  Mosaism  would  give  a  (X 
perilous  licence  to  sinful  passions.  St.  James  also  writes 
as  one  of  those  who  clung  fast  to  the  prerogatives  of 
Israel,  and  could  not  persuade  themselves  that  the 
coming  of  the  Jewish  Messiah,  so  long  expected,  would 
have  no  other  national  effect  than  to  deprive  them  of 
every  exclusive  privilege,  and  place  them  on  the  same 
level  as  the  heathens  from  whom  they  had  so  grievously 
suffered.  Further  than  this,  his  letter  shows  some 
alarm  lest  a  subjective  dogmatism  should  usurp  the 
place  of  a  practical  activity,  and  lest  phrases  about  faith 
should  be  accepted  as  an  excuse,  if  not  for  Antinomian 
licence,  at  least  for  dreamy  indifference  to  the  duties 
of  daily  life.  St.  James  keenly  dreaded  a  falling 
asunder  of  knowledge  and  action.^  His  letter  might 
seem  at  first  sigrht  to  be  the  most  direct  antithesis  to  the 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Galatians  and  the  Romans, 
and  to  reach  no  higher  standpoint  than  that  of  an 
idealised  Judaism  which  is  deficient  in  the  specific 
elements  of  Christianity.  It  does  not  even  mention  ^ 
the  word  Gospel.  The  name  of  Jesus  occurs  in  it  but  i/  v/ 
twice.  Nothing  is  said  in  it  of  the  work  of  Redemption.  ^ 
Even  the  rules  of  morality  are  enforced  without  any  ^ 
appeal  to  those  specific  Christian  motives  which  give 

^  Ps.  cxix.  ftxssvm..  *  Wiesinger,  Binl.  p.  42. 

h  2 


4  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY 

to  Christian  morality  its  glow  and  enthusiasm,  and 
which  occur  so  repeatedly  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
St.  Peter,  and  St.  John.  "  Be  ye  doers  of  the  word,''  he 
says,  "  7iot  hearers  only.''  ^  "  IF  ho  is  wise  among  you  ?  Let 
him  show  forth  his  works  icith  meekness  of  wisdom." ' 
"Adtdterers  and  adulteresses,  know  ye  not  that  the  friend- 
ship of  the  world  is  enmity  with  God?"^  "  Take  the  prophets, 
my  brethren,  as  an  example  of  suffering  and  of  patience."^ 
"  Go  to  now,  ye  rich,  weip  and  howl."  ^  Is  it  possible  to 
deny  that  there  is  a  difference  between  the  tone  of 
these  appeals  and  such  as  "  /  have  been  crucified  with 
Christ."  ^  "  But  I  say  walk  in  the  Spirit." '  "  l^ie 
love  of  Christ  constraineth  us."  ^  "  We  2cere  buried  with 
Ilim  by  baptism  unto  death  .  .  .  so  let  us  also  walk  in  new- 
71CSS  of  life."  ^  "As  he  who  called  you  is  holy,  so  become 
ye  holy."  '^^  "  Tliis  is  the  message  which  ye  heard  from  the 
beginning,  that  we  love  one  another."  ^^  It  was  the  pre- 
sence of  such  peculiarities  which  made  Luther  take  up 
his  hasty,  scornful,  and  superficial  \dew  of  the  Epistle. 
"  On  that  account,"  he  said,  "  the  Epistle  of  James, 
compared  with  them  (the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul),  is  a 
veritable  straw-Epistle  {recht  strohern),  for  it  lacks 
all  Evangelical  character."  ^^  "  This  Epistle  of  James, 
although  rejected  by  the  ancients,^^  I  praise  and  esteem 
good  withal,  because  it  setteth  not  forth  any  doctrine 

of  man But  to  give  my  opinion,  yet  without  the 

prejudice  of 'any  one,  I  count  it  to  be  no  Apostle's 
writing,  and  this  is  my  reason  :  first,  because,  contrary 

'  i-  22.  2  iii.  13.  3  iv  4.  4  V.  5. 

^  V.  1.  0  (3al.  ii.  20.  1  Gal.  v.  IG.  »  2  Cor.  v.  14. 

'  Rom.  vi.  4.        '»  1  Pet.  i.  15.         "  1  Joliii  iii.  11. 
'2  Preface  to  Now  Tostamcut  of  1524,  p.  105. 

"  Tliis  is  liardly  a  fair  account  of  the  history  of  the  Epistle  aud  its 
reception  iuto  the  Cauon. 


LUTHER   ON   ST.   JAMES.  5 

to  St.  Paul's  writings  and  all  other  Scriptures,  it  puts 
righteousness  in  works,"  on  which  account  he  thinks 
that  its  author  was  merely  "  some  good,  pious  man," 
though  in  other  places  he  seems  to  think  that  it  was 
written  by  James  the  son  of  Zebedee.^  It  was,  perhaps, 
hardly  strange  that  Luther,  who  did  not  possess  the  clue 
by  which  alone  the  apparent  contradictions  to  St.  Paul 
could  be  explained,  should  have  arriv^ed  at  this  opinion. 
To  him  the  letter  seemed  to  be  in  direct  antagonism  to 
the  truth  which  had  wrought  his  own  conversion,  and 
which  became  powerful  in  his  hands  for  the  overthrow 
of  sacerdotal  usurpation  and  the  revival  of  religious 
faith.  But  this  unfavourable  opinion  of  the  Epistle 
lingered  on.  It  is  found  in  the  Magdeburg  centuriators 
and  in  Strobel,  who  said  that,  "  no  matter  in  what  sense 
we  take  the  Epistle,  it  is  always  in  conflict  with  the 
remaining  parts  of  Holy  Writ."  On  similar  grounds 
Erasmus,  Cajetan,  Grotius,  and  Wetstein  hesitated  to 
accept  it.^     Such  views  are  untenable,  because  they  are 

^  In  1519,  lie  calls  it  "  wholly  inferior  to  the  Apostolic  majesty  "  (in 
the  seventh  Thesis  against  Eck) ;  in  1520,  "  unworthy  of  an  Apostolic 
spirit  "  {Be  Captiv.  Babylon.).  In  the  Postills  he  says  it  was  written  by 
no  Apostle,  and  is  "  nowhere  fully  conformable  to  the  true  Apostolic 
character  and  manner,  and  to  pure  doctrine."  In  his  preface  to  the  Ejiistle, 
in  1522  {Werke,  xiv.  1'48),  he  speaks  almost  contemptuously.  "He"  (St. 
James),  he  says,  "  has  aimed  to  refute  those  who  relied  on  faith  without 
works,  and  is  too  weak  for  his  task  in  mind,  understanding,  and  icords, 
mutilates  the  Scriptures,  and  tlius  directly  {stracks)  contradicts  Paul  and  all 
Scripture,  seeking  to  accomplish  by  enforcing  the  law  what  the  Apostles 
successfidly  effect  by  love.  Therefore,  I  will  not  place  his  Epistle  in  my 
Bible  among  the  proper  leading  books."  Nor  did  he  ever,  as  is  sometimes 
asserted,  retract  these  opinions.  His  Table  Talk  shows  that  he  held 
them  to  the  last,  and  considered  St.  James  irreconcilable  with  St.  Paul 
{Colloq.  Ixix.  4).  See  the  quotation, m/ra,  p.  90.  Archdeacon  Hare  (Mission 
of  the  Comforter,  ii.  815)  rightly  says  that  "Luther's  words  cannot  always 
be  weighed  in  jewellers'  scales." 

2  The  objections  of  Schleiermacher,  De  Wette,  Reuss,  Baur,  Sehwcgler, 
Ritschl,  Davidson,  etc.,  are  based  on  critical  and  other  grounds. 


4^ 


\y 


6  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

onesided.  We  shall  consider  afterwards  the  alleged 
polemic  against  St.  Paul;  and  in  judging  of  the  Epistle 
generally  we  must  bear  in  mind  its  avowedly  prac- 
tical character,   and  the  entire  training  of  the  writer 

^  and  of  those  to  whom  it  was  addressed.  The  pur- 
pose for  which  it  was  written  was  to  encourage  the 
Jewish  Christians  to  the  endurance  of  trial  by  stirring 
them  up  to  a  brighter  energy  of  holy  living.  And  in 
doing  this  he  neither  urges  a  slavish  obedience  nor  a 
terrified  anxiety.  If  he  does  not  dwell,  as  assuredly 
he  does  not,  on  the  specific  "Christian  motives,  he  does 
not  at  any  rate  put  in  their  place  a  ceremonial 
/  righteousness.  His  ideals  are  the  ideals  of  truth  and 
wisdom,  not  of  accurate  legality.  The  Law  which  he 
has  in  view  is  not  the  threatful  Law  of  Moses,  which 
/  gendereth  to  bondage,  but  the  royal  Law,  the  perfect  Law 

J  !  of  liberty,  the  Law  as  it  was  set  forth  in  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount.  He  is  the  representative,  not  of  Judaism, 
but  of  Christian  Judaism — that  is,  of  Judaism  in  its 
transformation  and  transfiguration.  A  book  may  be  in 
the  highest  sense  Christian  and  religious  without 
using  the  formulas  of  religion  and  Christianity.  The 
Book  of  Esther  is  a  Sacred  book,  a  book  of  the  inspired 
Canon,  and  a  book  justly  valued,  though  it  does  not 
so  much  as  mention  the  name  of  God.  The  bottom 
of  the  ocean  is  always  presupposed  as  existent  though  it 
be  neither  visible  nor  alluded  to.  And,  as  we  shall  see 
later  on,  there  are  passages  in  the  Epistle  of  St.  James 
which  involve  the  deepest  truths  of  that  Christian 
faith  of  which  he  avows  himself  a  humble  follower, 
although  it  was  not  his  immediate  object  to  develop 
the  dogmatic  side  of  Christianity  at  all.  If  some 
of  the  weightiest  Christian  doctrines  are  not  touched 


DATE   OF  THE   EPISTLE.  7 

upon,  there  are,  on  the  other  hand,  more  references  to 
the  discourses  of  Christ  in  this  Epistle  than  in  all  the 
others  put  together.^ 

If  we  could  be  certain  of  the  date  of  the  Epistle,  and 
of  the  characters  whom  St.  James  had  chiefly  in  view, 
some  light  would  doubtless  be  thrown  on  these  pecu- 
liarities. But  on  these  subjects  we  are  unfortunately 
in  doubt.  Amid  the  differing  opinions  respecting  the 
date,  I  side  with  those  who  look  upon  the  Epistle  as 
one  of  the  later,  not  as  perhaps  the  earliest,  in  the 
Canon,  One  or  two  facts  seem  to  point  in  this  direction. 
On  the  one  hand,  the  Epistle  could  not  have  been  , 
written  after  the  year  a.d.  63,  because  in  that  year 
St.  James  was  martyred.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
condition  and  wide  dissemination  of  the  Churches  to 
which  it  is  addressed ;  the  prevalence  of  the  name 
Christ  instead  of  the  title  "  the  Christ "  ;  ^  the  growth 
of  respect  for  persons  as  shown  in  distinction  of  seats ; 
the  sense  of  delay  in  the  Second  Coming,^  and  other 
circumstances,  make  it  necessary  to  assume  that  many 
years  had  elapsed  since  the  Day  of  Pentecost.  Further, 
it  seems  probable  that  some  of  St.  James's  allusions 
may  find  their  explanation  in  a  state  of  political 
excitement,  caused  by  hopes  and  fears  which,  perhaps, 
within  a  year  or  two  of  the  time  when  it  was 
written,  broke  out  in  the  wild  scenes  of  the  Jewish 
revolt.  Lastly,  it  seems  impossible  to  deny  that 
although  St.  James  may  have  written  his  arguments 
about  faith  and  works*  without  having  read  what  had 
been  written  on  the  same  subject  by  St.  Paul,^  and  in 

'  See  Dollinger,  First  Age  of  the  Church,  p.  107  (tr.  Oxenham). 

2  ii.  7.  3  V.  7,  8.  *  ii.  'Jl— 26. 

^  It  is  not  necessary   to   assume   in   consequence   that   '•  Apostolical 


8  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  still  his  language  finds  its 

most  reasonable  explanation  in  the  supposition  that  he 

^  ^   is  striving  to  remove  the  dangerous  inferences  to  which 

,^\y     St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  was   liable 

^  when  it  was  wrested  by  the  unlearned  and  the  ignorant.^ 
If  so,  the  Epistle  cannot  have  been  written  niore  than 
a  year  or  two  before  St.  James's  death,  since  the  date 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  is  a.d.  57,  and  that  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans  a.d.  58.  It  has  been  urged 
against  this  conclusion  that  if  it  had  been  written  later 
than  the  so-called  "Council  of  Jerusalem"  in  a.d.  50, 
it  must  have  contained  references  to  the  great  dispute 
about  the  obligations  of  circumcision.  But  the  circum- 
cision question,  fiercely  as  it  was  debated  at  the  time, 
was    speedily    forgotten ;    and    it    must    be    borne    in 

\y  mind  that  St.  James  is  writing  exclusively  to  Jews. 
Again,  it  has  been  urged  that  the  trials  to  which  he 
alludes  must  have  been  the  persecutions  at  Jerusalem, 
in  which  Saul  and  Herod  Agrippa  I.  were  respectively 
the  chief  movers.  But  persecution  in  one  form  or 
other  was  the  chronic  trial  of  Jewish  as  well  as  of  other 


Epistles  were  transcribed  by  the  linndred  and  circulated  broadcast " ;  or 
that  "  copies  of  wliat  was  written  for  Rome  or  Galatia  would  bo  at  once 
despatched  by  a  special  courier  to  the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem  "  (Plumptre, 
p.  42).  Tlie  Clmrcli  of  Jerusalem  was  kept  well  acquainted  with  the 
movements  and  tenets  of  St.  Paul,  and  any  of  the  Passover  pilgrims  from 
Asia  Minor  might  have  informed  James  of  tlie  drift  of  the  Apostle's  argu- 
ments, and  of  some  of  his  more  striking  expressions,  even  if  ho  could  not 
procure  a  copy  of  a  comiilete  Epistle. 

1  Baur  says  (Ch.  Hist.  p.  128),  "It  is  impossible  to  deny  that  tlie 
Epistle  of  James  presupposes  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  justification."  He 
admits  tliat  "  it  may  nut  be  aimed  directly  against  the  Apostle  himself,"  but 
says  that,  if  so,  "  its  tendency  is  distinctly  anti-Pauline."  Nevertlieless, 
both  St.  Paul  and  St.  James  might,  in  the  sense  in  wliich  they  were  alone 
intended,  liave  interclianged^  each  other's  apparently  antagonistic  formulae. 
See  infra,  pp.  90 — 96. 


l> 


WRITTEN  AT   JERUSALEM.  9 

Christians.  To  refer  to  the  existence  of  deep  poverty 
as  a  sign  that  the  Epistle  was  written  about  the  time 
of  the  general  famine  of  a.d.  44  is  to  rely  on  a  very- 
shadowy  argument,  since  famines  at  this  period  were  by 
no  means  unfrequent,  and  poverty  was  the  perma- 
nent condition  of  the  saints  at  Jerusalem.  I  therefore 
disagree  with  the  views  of  Neander,  Alford,  and  Dr. 
Plumptre,  who  argue  for  the  early  date  ;  and  I  agree 
with  those  of  De  Wette,  Bishop  Wordsworth,  and 
many  others,  who  fix  the  date  of  the  Epistle  about  the  ^V 
year  a.d.  61.^ 

If,  however,  the  date  of  the  Epistle  be  uncertain,  we 
have  no  uncertainty  about  the  place  where  it  was 
written.  That  is  undeniably  Jerusalem.  When 
once  settled  in  that  city,  St.  James,  with  the  natural 
stationariuess  of  the  Oriental,  seems  never  to  have  left 
it.  Its  Temple  and  ritual  would  have  had  for  him  a 
strong  attraction.  The  notion  of  writing  the  Epistle 
may  have  partly  originated  from  the  circumstance 
that  the  Jewish  high  priest  sent  missives  from  the 
Holy  City,  which  were  received  with  profound  respect 
throughout  the  length  and  breadth  of  the  Disper- 
sion. Similarly,  the  first  bishop  of  the  metropolis  of 
Christianity  was  one  to  whom  every  Jewish  Church 
might  naturally  look  for  advice  and  consolation.  The 
physical  allusions  in  the  Epistle  to  oil,  and  wine, 
and  figs,  to  salt  and  bitter  springs,  to  the  Kauson,  or 
burning  wind  of  Palestine,  and,  above  all,  to  the  former 
and  the  latter  rain,  show  that  the  letter  was  despatched 

1  Eusebius  (H".  'E.  ii.  23  ;  iii.  11)  gives  a.d.  69  as  the  date  of  St.  James's 
death,  apparently  bccaiise  Hegesippns  said  that  the  sicgo  liappened 
"  immediately  afterwards."  But  if  the  narrative  of  Josephus  is  correct, 
St.  James  could  not  have  been  killed  later  than  a.d.  C3.  This  is  the  date 
given  by  Eusebius  in  his  Chronicon. 


10  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

from  Jerusalem.  Some  have  supposed  that  it  was  written 
at  Joppa;  but  this  is  only  a  precarious  inference  from 
the  allusion  to  the  life  of  the  shore  and  the  traffic  in 
the  harbour,  the  fish  and  the  wonders  of  the  sea.^ 
There  can,  at  any  rate,  be  no  doubt  that  it  emanated 
from  Palestine. 

In  this  Palestinian  origin  I  see  an  explanation  of 
some  of  the  phenomena  of  the  Epistle.  We  see,  for 
instance,  why  it  is  that  St.  James  seems  to  be  speaking 
sometimes  to  Jews  and  sometimes  to  Christians,  some- 
times to  all  the  Churches  of  the  Dispersion  and  some- 
times almost  exclusively  to  the  Churches  of  Judaea. 
The  difficulty  vanishes  when  we  remember  the  position 
of  the  writer.  He  is  addressing  "  the  Twelve  Tribes 
of  the  Dispersion."  It  was  a  sufficiently  wide  range — 
wider  than  that  of  any  one  of  the  Epistles.  It  included 
Parthians,  and  Medes,  and  Elamites,  dwellers  in  Cap- 
padocia,  Galatia,  Pontus,  Asia,  Phrygia,  Pamphylia, 
Egypt,  the  parts  of  Libya  about  Cyrene,  strangers  at 
Home,  Cretes  and  Arabians,  Jews  and  proselytes.' 
But  of  the  varying  conditions  of  these  widely-scattered 
communities  he  could  know  almost  nothing.  He  could 
have  no  information  about  them  except  such  as  he 
might  now  and  then  derive  from  the  general  talk  of 
some  Passover  pilgrim.  He  addresses  them,  indeed,  as 
a  "Christian  high  priest  wearing  the  golden  mitre" 
might  have  done,  or  as  a  sort  of  ideal  Be><h  Galufha,  or 
"  Prince  of  the  Captivity,"  might  have  addressed  his 
fellow-countrymen  in  later   days.^     But. he  could  only 

1  Jftines  i.  6;   iii.  4;  iv.  13  (Hausrath,  N.  Test.  Zeitg.  1,  §  5). 

-  Acts  ii.  9 — 12.  The  roador  will  find  a  sketch  of  the  character  of  the 
Jewish  Dispersion,  and  of  the  events  which  led  to  it,  in  my  Life  of  St. 
Paul,  i.pp.  115—125. 

'  The  Jews  of  the  Dispersion  in  Babylonia  were  called  "  the  Gola,"  or 


TYRANNY   OF   THE   RICH.  11 

speak  on  topics  which  he  might  infer  to  be  necessary 
because  he  saw  that  they  were  necessary  for  the  Syrian 
Churches,  with  whose  trials  and  temptations  he  had  an 
exclusive  familiarity.  His  remarks,  for  instance,  about 
the  conduct  of  the  rich,  and  the  bearing  of  the  poor 
towards  them,  have  created  the  greatest  perplexity. 
These  rich  men,  whose  arrogance  is  described  as  so 
outrageous,  were  they  Jews,  Christians,  or  Gentiles? 
I  think  that  I  find  an  explanation  of  his  allusions  in 
conduct  which  he  saw  daily  taking  place  under  his  own 
eyes.  The  Jewish  Church  at  Jerusalem  was  at  that 
time  governed  by  a  clique  of  aristocratic  Sadducees.  '^ 
They  were  men  of  immense  wealth,  which  they  increased 
by  violent  and  dishonest  exactions.  Profoundly  hated  by 
the  people,  they  were  yet  kept  secure  in  their  positions 
by  the  close  understanding  which  they  usually  preserved 
with  the  Herods  and  the  Eomans.  Outwardly,  there- 
fore, they  w^ere  treated  wdth  abject  reverence,  and  in 
spite  of  the  curses,  not  loud  but  deep,  which  were  secretly 
littered  against  them,  and  which  were  soon  to  burst  in 
vengeance  upon  their  heads,  they  were  able  to  exercise 
an  almost  uncontrolled  authority.  When  we  read  side 
by  side  the  denunciations  hurled  by  St.  James  against 
the  tyrannous  greed  and  cruel  insolence  of  the  rich, 
and  the  eight-fold  and  thrice-repeated  curse  of  the 
Talmud^  against  the  blood-stained  and  worldly  hierarchs 
who  disgraced  the  mitre  of  Aaron,  it  will  be  seen,  I  think, 
that  these  passages  of  the  Epistle  sprang,  at  least  in 
part,   from  the   indignation   with  which   the    Christian 

"  Deportation,"  and  they  enjoyed  a  sort  of  independence  under  a  ruler  of 
their  own  choice  known  as  the  B^sli  Galutha.  See  on  his  office,  Etheridge, 
Hcbr.  Lit.  151,  seq. 

1  Pesachim,   57,   a  ;    Tosef  ta  Menachoth ;    Derenbourg,   Palest.   233 ; 
Geiger,  Urschrift,  118. 


12  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

bishop  had  witnessed  the  conduct  of  the  detested 
Boetliusim  and  Beni-Hanan.  To  their  vengeance  he 
at  last  succumbed,  and  under  their  avarice  and  world- 
liness  the  Jews  of  that  day  vainly  struggled,  St. 
James  says  : — 

"  Do  not  ricli  men  oppress  you,  and  draw  you  before  the  judg- 
ment seats]  Do  tliey  not  blaspheme  that  worthy  name  by  the 
whicli  ye  are  called  ] " ' 

And  again — 

"  Go  to  now,  ye  rich  men ;  weep  and  howl  for  the  misei'ies  that 
shall  come  upon  you.  .  .  .  Behold  the  hire  of  the  labourers  which 
have  reaped  down  your  fields,  which  is  of  you  kept  back  by  fraud, 
crieth.  .  .  .  Ye  have  lived  in  pleasure  in  the  earth,  and  been 
wanton ;  ye  have  nourished  your  hearts  as  in  a  day  of  slaughter ;  ye 
have  condemned  and  killed  the  just,  and  he  doth  not  resist  you."^ 

It  is  obvious  that  these  remarks  could  not  apply  to 
the  treatment  of  the  poor  by  the  rich  throughout  all  the 
Ghettos  and  Christian  communities  of  the  world.  In 
the  infant  Churches,  during  the  whole  of  the  first 
century,  there  were  "  not  many  rich."  ^  The  few 
wealthy  and  noble  Grentiles  who  were  converted  were  so 
far  from  being  able  to  wield  such  a  tyranny  as  St. 
James  describes,  that,  in  the  gatherings  of  the  converts, 
they  might  be  under  the  spiritual  supervision  of  pres- 
byters and  "  bishops  "  who  occupied  no  higher  earthly 
rank  than  that  of  slaves.  Moreover,  no  Christian 
could  have  dared  to  "  blaspheme  " — that  is,  to  speak 
injuriously  of  the  name  of  "  Christian  "  or  of  "  Christ." 
But  St.  James  is  not  thinking  exclusively  of  Christian 
communities.  He  is  writing  of  things  which  were  on 
the   horizon   of  his    daily   life.     Eead    what  the   Tal- 

»  Ja.  u.  G,  7.  »  V.  1-6.  2  ICor.  i.  26. 


OPPRESSIVE   SADDUCEES.  13 

mudists  say  of  the  priestly  families  by  which  he  was 
surrounded,  and  his  allusions  at  once  become  explicable. 
For  thus  in  the  tract  Yoraa  (f.  9,  a)  we  find : — 

"  What  is  meant  by  Ps.  x.  27,  '  The  fear  of  the 
Lord  prolongeth  days,  but  the  years  of  the  wicked  shall 
be  shortened'?  The  first  clause  alludes  to  the  410 
years  of  the  first  Temple,  during  which  period  there 
were  but  eighteen  high  priests.  But  '  t/ie  years  of  the 
wicked  shall  he  shortened '  is  illustrated  by  the  fact  that 
during  the  426  years  of  the  second  Temple  there  were 
more  than  300  high  priests  in  succession.  So  that, 
deducting  the  forty  years  of  Simon  the  Righteous,  and 
the  eighty  of  Rabbi  Jochanan,  and  the  ten  of  Ishmael 
Ben  Phabi,  it  is  evident  that  not  one  of  the  remaining 
high  priests  lived  to  hold  office  for  a  whole  year."  ^ 
The  supposed  fact  is  unhistorical,  but  the  remark  shows 
in  what  low  estimation  these  later  hierarchs  were  held. 

Again,  in  the  tract  Pesachim  (57,  a)  we  find  one  of 
several  repetitions  of  the  famous  malediction  on  those 
priestly  families  : — 

"  Woe  unto  the  family  of  Boethus, 

Woe  to  their  bludgeons  ! 
Woe  to  the  house  of  Hanan, 

Woe  to  their  viper  hissings  ! 
Woe  to  the  family  of  Canthera, 

Woe  to  their  libels  ! 
Woe  to  the  family  of  Ishmael  Ben-Phabi 

Woe  to  their  blows  with  the  fist ! 

"  They  are  themselves  chief  priests,  their  sons  are  treasurers,  their 
sons-in-law  captains  of  the  Temple,  and  their  servants  strike  the 
people  with  their  staves." 

'  Hershon,  Talm.  Miscell.  p.  107.  All  insolent  priests  wore  supposed 
to  be  descended  from  Pashur,  the  son  of  Immer.  Kiddushin,  f.  70  6.  (id. 
p.  244). 


14  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Again,  we  are  told  that  the  Vestibule  of  the  Temple 
uttered  four  cries — "  Depart  hence,  sons  of  Eli,  who 
defile  the  Temple  of  the  Eternal !  Depart,  Issachar  of 
Kephar  Barkai,  who  only  carest  for  self,  and  profanest 
the  victims  consecrated  to  Heaven ! "  And  again  : 
"  Open,  ye  gates,  let  Ishmael  Ben  Phabi  enter,  the 
disciple  of  Phinehas  (son  of  Eli),  to  do  the  duties  of 
high  priest ;  open,  let  John,  son  of  Nebedseus,  enter, 
the  disciple  of  gluttons,  to  gorge  himself  with  victims."^ 

Tales  of  these  priests — their  luxury,  their  gluttony, 
their  simony,  their  avarice,  their  atheism — long  lingered 
in  the  hearts  of  the  people.  They  told  how  this 
Issachar,  in  his  fastidious  insolence,  had  had  silk  gloves 
made  to  prevent  the  soiling  of  his  hands  while  he  sac- 
rificed; of  the  calves  which  John,  son  of  Nebedseus, 
had  devoured,  and  the  tuns  of  wine  which  he  had 
drunk ;  how  Martha,  daughter  of  Boethus,  had  bought 
the  priesthood  for  her  husband  Joshua,  son  of  Gamala, 
for  two  bushels  of  gold  denarii,  and  had  carpets  spread 
from  her  house  to  the  Temple  when  she  went  to  see 
him  sacrifice ;  how  the  house  of  Hanan  deliberately 
raised  the  price  of  doves,  in  order  to  make  gain  out  of 
the  poor,  till  they  were  liberated  from  this  tyranny  by 
Gamaliel,  the  grandson  of  Hillel ;  how  Eliezer  Ben 
Charsom  went  to  the  Temple  in  a  robe  which  had  cost 
20,000  minai,  and  which  was  so  transparent  that  the 
other  priests  forbade  him  to  wear  it.^  Even  Josephus 
bears  witness  to  the  ruthless  extortion  and  cruelty  with 
which  they  defrauded  the  inferior  priests  of  their  dues 

*  PesacLim,  I.  c,  and  Kerithoth,  28,  a. 

«  Yoma,  35,  b.  See  RaphaU,  Hist,  of  Jews,  ii.  370;  Gratz,  Gesch.  de 
Juden,  iii.  321 ;  Dorenbourp;,  I'alesl.  p.  233,  seqq.,  aud  my  Life  of  Chrid, 
ii.  330 — 3i2,  where  the  origiiial  references  are  given. 


TONE   OF   ST.   JAMES.  15 

until  they  were  almost  reduced  to  the  verge  of  starva- 
tion.^ In  the  section  which  follows  his  account  of  the 
murder  of  James,  he  says  that  the  greedy  procurator 
Albinus  cultivated  the  friendship  of  Joshua,  the  high 
priest,  and  the  other  chief  priests,  and  joined  with  them 
in  robbing  the  threshing-floors  by  violence,  and  that 
for  this  reason  some  of  the  priests  died  from  inability  to 
recover  the  tithes  which  were  their  sole  means  of  sus- 
tenance. 

But,  while  he  thus  alluded  to  the  state  of  things  in 
Jerusalem,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  St.  James  mainly 
intended  to  address  Christians.  Otherwise  he  would 
have  added  some  explanation  of  his  simple  title, 
"  James,  a  servant  of  God  and  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ."^  Nor  could  he  otherwise  have  said,  "  My 
brethren,  have  not  the  faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  Lord  of  Grlory,  with  respect  of  persons;"^  nor 
again,  "  Be  patient,  therefore,  brethren,  unto  the 
coming  of  the  Lord.""^  How  is  it,  then,  that  the 
Epistle  contains  none  of  the  rich  and  advanced 
Christology  of  many  other  Epistles  ?  that  the  allusions 
to  specific  Christian  doctrine  and  motive  are  so  rare  ? 
How  is  it  that  the  word  "  gospel  "  does  not  once  occur 
in  it  ?  that  Christianity  is  still  viewed  under  the  aspect 
of  Law,  though  truly  of  an  idealised  and  royal  Law  ? 
that  the  general  tone  of  appeal  is  much  more  like  that 
of  John  the  Baptist  than  that  of  St.  Paul,  St.  Peter, 
and  St.  John  ?     How  is  it  that  next  to  the  moral  parts 

1  Jos.  ^n<«.  XX.  8,  §  8;  9,  §2.  *  i.  1.  Mi.  1. 

*  V.  7.  See  other  distinctively  Christian  allusions  in  i.  18 :  "  Of  His 
own  will  begat  He  us  by  the  word  of  truth;"  ii.  7  :  "Do  they  not  blas- 
pheme that  worthy  name  by  which  ye  are  called  ?  "  v.  6  :  "  Ye  condemned 
and  killed  the  Just;"  v.  14  :  "  Anointing  him  with  oil  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord." 


16  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  St.  James  is  most  fre- 
quent in  his  references  to  books  of  apocryphal  wisdom, 
written  by  unconverted  Jews  ?  How  is  it  that  there 
are  whole  sections  which  might  have  been  almost  writ- 
ten by  an  Epictetus  or  a  Marcus  Aurelius?  I  think 
that  the  reason,  and  the  only  reason,  which  can  be 
\y  given,  is  that  while  he  is  loritinj^.An  the  first  instance 
to  Christians,  he  \s  Jjtinking  to  a  great  extent  of  Jews. 
The  Christians  were  few,  the  Jews  many.  He  has 
begun  by  saying  that  he  is  writing  to  the  Twelve 
Tribes  of  the  Dispersion,  and  he  meant  his  letter  to  be 
delivered  primarily  to  the  Christians  among  them.     But 

\^  the  Christians  whom  he  has  in  view  were  also  Jews. 
He  does  not  even  allude  to  the  Gentiles.  The  converts 
whom  he  addresses  had  never  thought  of  deserting  the 
ceremonies,  or  abandoning  what  they  imagined  to   be 

]^  the  exclusive  privileges  of  the  chosen  seed.^  And  he 
was  himself  a  Jew,  living  among  Jews,  and  living  in  all 
respects  as  a  Jew  of  the  strictest  orthodoxy,  reverenced 
even  by  many  who  regarded  his  belief  in  Christ  as  a  mere 
aberration — a  mere  excrescence  on  his  Judaic  devotion. 
It  was  from  Jews,  not  from  Christians, — it  was  because 
[/  of  accuracy  in  Jewish  observances,  not  for  strictness  of 
Christian  morality, — that  he  had  received  the  surname  of 
"  the  Just."  Let  it  be  borne  in  mind  that,  alike  amid 
Jews  and  Gentiles,  the  distinction  between  the  Jew 
and  the  Christian  was  infinitely  less  wide  in  the  first 
generation  after  Christ's  death  than  it  afterwards 
became.  St.  Paul,  even  after  he  had  written  the 
Epistles  to  the  Romans  and  Galatians,  did  not  hesitate 

*  Wo  have  observed  the  same  j)]ienomena  of  a  sort  of  fluiil  oonscious- 
noss  as  to  tho  renders  whom  ho  is  addressing  in  St.  Patd's  Epistle  to 
tho  Romans.     See  Life  and  Work  of  St.  Paul,  ii.  168, 169. 


JUDAISM  AND   CHRISTIANITY.  17 

to  exclaim  before  the  assembled  Sanliedrin,  "  Brethren, 
I  am  a  Pharisee,  a  son  of  Pharisees,"  and  to  reduce  the 
whole  question  between  him  and  them  to  a  question  of 
believing-  in  the  Resurrection.  As  a  Nazarite,  as  an 
heir  of  David,  as  having  priestly  blood  in  his  veins,  as 
one  whose  faithfulness  was  known  to  all  the  dwellers 
in  Jerusalem,  and  to  all  who  visited  it,  as  a  Jew 
who  walked  in  all  the  commandments  and  ordinances 
of  the  Law  blameless,  James  might  well  consider 
it  his  duty  to  address  words  of  warning  and  exhor- 
tation, primarily  indeed  to  the  Christian  Churches 
of  Judiea,  but  through  them  to  all  his  countrymen. 
To  him  the  Church  is  still  not  only  the  Ecclesia 
(v.  14),  but  the  Synagogue  (ii.  2) — a  word  which 
even  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
seems  purposely  to  avoid,  but  which  was  used  ex- 
dmively  by  the  Ebionites.^  When  alluding  to  the 
object  of  faith,  he  speaks  not  of  Christ,  but  of  "  One 
God"  (ii.  19).  He  warns  against  swearing  by  the 
heaven  and  by  the  earth  (v.  12),  which  we  know  from 
the  Gospels  (Matt.  v.  33)  to  have  been  common  formulas 
of  Jewish  adjuration.  He  saw  in  Jews  the  catechu- 
mens of  Christianity,  and  in  Christians  the  ideal  Jews. 
The  fact  is,  that  alike  in  the  real  and  in  the  traditional 
St.  James  we  see  the  traces  of  views  which  distinguished 
three  parties  of  Jewish  Christians  in  the  first  century, 
and  which  continued  to  exist  in  three  classes  of  Jewish 
Christians  in  the  second.  Like  St.  Paul  and  like  the 
Nazarenes,  he  did  not  insist  on  the  observance  of 
Mosaism  by  the  Gentiles ;  yet,  like  the  milder  Ebion- 
ites,  he  appears  to  have  leaned — or,  at  any  rate,  his 
followers  leaned — to  the  belief  that  even  for  Gentiles 

^  Epiphan.  Haer.  xxx.  18. 
C 


18  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

they  might  be  of  great  importance ;  and,  like  the  Es- 
sene  or  ascetic  Judaists,  he  personally  adopted  the  rigid 
practices  which  may  have  been  to  hira  a  valuable 
training  in  self-discipline,  but  which  the  Colossian 
and  other  heretics  regarded  as  constituting  a  legal 
righteousness.  To  us  the  name  "  Jewish  Christian  " 
may  seem  almost  an  oxymoron  —  a  juxtaposition  of 
contrary  terms.  We  see  with  St.  Paul — whose  opin- 
ions had  been  the  result  of  special  divine  training — 
that  between  the  bondage  of  ceremonialism  and  the 
freedom  of  Christianity — between  the  righteousness  of 
legal  ordinances  and  justification  by  faith — there  is  a 
profound  antithesis.  But  it  was  impossible  that  it 
could  wear  this  aspect  to  the  early  Christians.  We 
view  the  matter  after  nineteen  centuries  of  Christian 
experience ;  they  were  the  immediate  heirs  of  nineteen 
centuries  of  Jewish  history. 

But  while  in  the  first  line  of  his  letter  St.  James 
testifies  to  his  own  faith,  he  must  have  known  that 
his  words  would  be  received  with  respect  by  genuine 
Hebrews,  and  that  it  would  be  useless  to  enforce  the 
lessons  which  he  wished  to  impress  upon  all  his 
countrymen  by  appeals  distinctively  Christian.  His 
whole  nation  was  in  a  state  of  wild  tumult;  swayed 
by  passion  and  worldliness ;  indulging  in  the  fierce 
language  of  hatred,  fanaticism,  and  conceit ;  becoming 
godless  in  their  tone  of  thought;  relying  on  the 
orthodoxy  of  Monotheism ;  careless  and  selfish  in 
the  duties  of  life ;  forgetful  of  the  omnipotence  of 
prayer.  And  the  Christians  whom  he  is  addressing, 
being  Jews,  participated  in  these  dangers.  He  wished 
to  make  the  Christians  better  Christians,  to  teach 
them  a  truer  wisdom,  a  purer  morality.      He  wished 


ESSENES   AND   EBIONITES.  19 

to  make  them  better  Christians  by  making  them 
better  Israelites  ;  and  he  wished  to  convert  the 
Israelites  into  being  worthier  members  of  the  com- 
monwealth of  Israel  before  he  could  win  them  to 
become  heirs  of  the  covenant  of  the  better  promise. 
If  we  bear  these  circumstances  in  mind,  if  we  also 
remember  that  his  letter  is  not  intended  for  a  dogmatic 
treatise,  but  for  the  moral  exhortation  of  one  to  whom 
the  Law  means  the  rule  of  life  as  Jesus  had  taught  it, 
we  shall  be  better  able  to  judge  of  the  rashness  which 
has  only  condemned  or  slighted  this  Epistle  because  it 
has  failed  to  understand  the  true  purpose  of  the  writer. 

Again,  to  grasp  the  full  meaning  of  St.  James,  we 
must  appreciate  the  passionate  earnestness  of  one  whose 
ideal  is  too  stern  to  admit  of  any  compromise  with  the 
aims  and  pleasures  of  the  world. 

i.  Critics  have  spoken  of  the  Essenism  and  the  Ebionism 
of  the  Epistle.  But  although  "  help  and  mercy  "  were 
special  duties  of  the  Essene,  and  though  St.  James 
"  writes  mercy  upon  his  flag,"  there  is  no  trace  that  he 
was  an  Essene.  Doubtless  he  sympathised  with  many 
of  the  views  of  that  singular  body.  Any  Essene  might 
have  spoken  just  as  St.  James  does  about  oaths,  and 
riches,  and  merchandise,  and  the  virtue  of  silence,  and 
the  duty  of  checking  wrath  ;^  but  so  might  any  Chris- 
tian who  had  studied,  as  St.  James  had  studied,  the 
precepts  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  The  later 
Ebionites  represented  Judaism  when  it  had  passed  into 
heresy.  The  views  and  tendencies  of  the  early  Chris- 
tians in  Jerusalem,  before  they  had  been  modified  by 

'  Comp.  Ja.  i.  19;  ii.  5,  13;  iv.  13;  v.  12;  with  Josephus,  Bell. 
Jud.  II.  8,  6,  and  Philo,  Quod  omnia  prob.  lib.,  §  12  ( Hilgouf eld,  Einleit. 
p.  539). 

c  2 


20  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

the  teachings  of  experience,  were  only  Ebionite  in  a 
sense  perfectly  innocent.  In  these  views  and  tendencies 
St.  James  shared,  but  he  did  not  fall  into  the  extravagant 
exaggeration  by  which  they  were  subsequently  carica- 
tured. 

ii.  Some,  again,  have  seen  in  the  expressions  of  St. 
James  an  Orphic  colourmq ;  but  of  this  we  require 
much  stronger  proof  than  the  phrases  "  the  engrafted 
word,"  or  "the  wheel  of  being"  (iii.  6),  even  though 
those  phrases  may  be  illustrated  by  parallels  in  the 
writings  of  Pythagoreans.^  Undoubtedly,  however,  we 
find  a  peculiarity  of  the  Epistle  in  the  extreme  frequency 
of  the  parallels  between  its  language  and  that  of  other 
writers.  These  are  so  numerous  that  I  have  no  space 
to  write  them  out  at  length,  but  no  careful  reader  can 
entirely  miss  them.^  They  show  how  strong  w^as  the 
originality  which  could  absorb  influences  from  many 
different  sources,  and  yet  maintain  its  own  perfect  in- 
dependence.    In  this  respect  the  Epistle  of  St.  James 

'  Tlie  hexameter  in  i.  17  (where  the  word  Scipijyua  is  iiiiknown  to  the 
N".  T.  iu  this  sense),  and  the  expression  "Father  of  lights"  have  been 
suspected  of  being  borrowed  from  Alexandrian  sources.  For  the  latter 
see  Dan.  viii.  10. 

2  Every  cliapter  will  furnish  parallels  to  passages  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  (see  Matt.  v.  3,  4,  10—12,  22,  24,  33—37,  48;  vi.  14,  15,  19,  24; 
vii.  1 — 5,  7 — 12,  21—23)  and  the  eschatological  discourse  (Mk.  xiii.  7, 9,  29, 
32).  For  tlie  very  remarkable  and  close  parallels  to  the  Book  of  Eccle- 
siasticus,  coiiip.  i.  5,  8 — 12,  13,  19,  23,  25 ;  iii.  5,  6,  respectively  with 
Eiclus.  XX.  15;  xli.  22;  i.  28;  xv.  11;  v.  11;  xx.  7;  xii.  11;  xiv.  23; 
xxviii.  10,  19  (especially  in  the  Greek).  For  parallels  to  the  Book  of 
Wisdom,  comp.  Ja.  i.  10,  11.  17,  20;  ii.  21 ;  iv.  14;  v.  1—6,  with  Wisdom 
ii.  8;  V.  8;  vii.  17—20;  xii.  16;  x.  5 ;  v.  9—14;  ii.  1—24.  For  parallels 
to  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  comp.  i.  5,  6,  12,  19,  21;  iii.  5;  iv.  6;  v.  20, 
respectively  with  Prov.  iii.  5.  6;  xxiii.  34;  iii.  11;  Eccl.  v.  2;  Prov. 
XXX.  12;  xvi.  27;  iii.  34;  x.  12.  Many  more  might  bo  added,  but  the 
student  who  will  verify  these  references  for  himself  will  see  how  fully  the 
points  mentioned  iu  the  text  are  proved. 


STYLE   OF  ST.  JAMES.  21 

differs  remarkably  from  the  Epistle  of  St.  Clemens  of 
liome.  St.  James,  even  while  he  borrows  alike  from 
Jewish  prophets  and  from  Alexandrian  theosophists, 
fuses  their  language  into  a  manifesto  of  Judaic  Chris- 
tianity by  the  heat  and  vehemence  of  his  own  indivi- 
duality. He  strikes  lightning  into  all  he  borrows.  St. 
Clemens  is  far  more  passively  receptive.  He  has  the 
amiable  and  conciliatory  catholicity  which  leads  him 
to  adopt  the  moral  teaching  of  all  schools ;  but  he 
has  none  of  the  individual  force  which  might  have 
enabled  him  to  infuse  into  what  he  has  borrowed  an 
individual  force. 

iii.  The  §tyh  of  St.  James,  as  compared  w^ith  his 
tone  of  thought,  presents  the  singular  combination  of 
pure,  eloquent,  and  even  rhythmical  Grreek,  with  the 
prophetic  vehemence  and  fiery  sternness  of  the  Hebrew 
prophet.  The  purity  of  the  Greek  idiom  has  been 
made  a  ground  for  doubting  the  genuineness  of  the 
Epistle.^  But  the  objection  is  without  weight.  Pales- 
tine— even  Galilee — was  in  those  days  bilingual.  James 
had  probably  spoken  Greek  from  his  birth.  He  would 
therefore  find  no  difficulty  in  writing  in  that  language, 
and  his  natural  aptitude  may  have  given  him  a  better 
style  than  that  of  many  of  his  countrymen.^  But  even 
if  not,  what  difficulty  is  there  in  the  supposition  that 
St.  James,  like  St.  Peter,  employed  an  *'  interpreter,"^  or 


^  E.g.,  De  Wette  asks,  How  could  James  write  sucli  good  Greek? 

2  Incomparably  better,  for  instance,  tlian  that  of  St.  John  in  the 
Apocalypse. 

^  St.  Mark  and  a  certain  Glaucias  are  both  mentioned  as  "interpre- 
ters "  of  St.  Peter.  Of  the  latter — claimed  as  an  authority  by  the 
Basil  idians—  nothing  is  known ;  but  St.  Mark  may  have  acted  as  "  in- 
terpreter "  to  St.  Peter  rather  when  he  needed  Latin  at  Rome  than  when 
he  wrote  in  Greek. 


22  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

adopted  the  common  plan  of  submitting  his  manuscript 
to  the  revision  of  some  accomplished  Hellenist  ?  The 
thoughts,  the  order  of  them,  and  the  tone  in  which 
they  are  expressed,  are  exactly  such  as  we  should  have 
expected,  from  all  that  we  know  of  the  writer.  The 
form-jyf  expression  may  easily  have  been  corrected  by 
any  literary  member  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem.  But 
the  accent  of  authority,  the  noble  sternness,  the  demand 
for  unwavering  allegiance  to  the  laws  of  God — even  the 
poetic  parallelisms^ — are  all  his  own.  When  Schleier- 
macher  speaks  of  "  much  bombast  "  in  the  Epistle,  and 
describes  the  style  as  being  "  in  part  ornate,  in  part 
clumsy,"  it  is  because  he  criticises  it  from  a  wrong 
standpoint.  It  is  like  Voltaire  criticising  ^schylus  or 
Shakspeare.  It  is  due  to  the  application  of  Hellenic 
canons  to  Semitic  genius.  The  style  of  St.  James  is 
formed  on  the  Hebrew  prophets,  as  his  thoughts  are 
influenced  by  the  Hebrew  gnomologists.  He  has 
nothinor  of  the  Pauline  method  of  dialectic ;  he  is  never 
swept  away,  like  St.  Paul,  by  the  tide  of  his  own  im- 
passioned feeling.  His  moral  earnestness  glows  with 
the  steady  light  of  a  furnace,  never  rushes  with  the 
uncontrolled  force  of  a  conflagration.  The  groups  of 
thoughts  follow  each  other  in  distinct  sections,  which 
never  interlace  each  other,  and  have  little  or  no  logical 
connexion  or  systematic  advance.  He  plunges  in 
medias  res  with  each  new  topic;  says  first  in  the 
plainest  and  most  straightforward  manner  exactly  what 
he  means  to  say,  and  enforces  it  afterwards  with  strong 
diction,  passionate  ejaculations,  rapid  interrogatives, 
and  graphic  similitudes.  He  genej'ally  begins  mildly, 
and  with  a  use  of  the  word  "brethren,"  but  as  he  dwells 

*  Bishop  Jebb,  Sacred  Literat.  p.  '273. 


STYLE  OF  ST.  JAMES.  23 

on  the  point  his  words  seem  to  grow  incandescent  with 
the  writer's  vehemence.^  In  many  respects  his  style 
resembles  that  of  a  fiery  prophetic  oration  rather  than 
of  a  letter.  The  sententious  form  is  the  expression  of 
a  practical  energy  which  will  tolerate  no  opposition. 
The  changes — often  apparently  abrupt — from  one  topic 
to  another ;  the  short  sentences,  which  seem  to  quiver 
in  the  mind  of  the  hearer  from  the  swiftness  with 
which  they  have  been  launched  forth ;  the  sweeping 
reproofs,  sometimes  unconnected  by  conjunctions,^ 
sometimes  emphasised  by  many  conjunctions  ;^  the 
manner  in  which  the  phrases  seem  to  catch  fire  as  the 
writer  proceeds;  the  vivid  freshness  and  picturesque 
energy  of  the  expressions;^ — all  make  us  fancy  that  we 
are  listening  to  some  great  harangue  which  has  for  its 
theme  the  rebuke  of  sin  and  the  exhortation  to 
righteousness,  in  order  to  avert  the  awfulness  of  some 
imminent  crisis.  The  power  of  his  style  consists  in  the 
impression  which  it  leaves  of  the  burning  sincerity  and 
lofty  character  of  the  author. 

iv.  For  these  reasons  it  is  almost  impossible  to  write 
an  analysis  of  the  Epistle.  The  analysis  is  only  a  cata- 
logue of  the   subjects  with  which  it  deals. ^     Writing 

'  As  bpecimeus  of  his  method  in  these  respects  see  ii.  1 — 13;  iv.  11, 12. 

-  Asyndetou,  or  absence  of  conjunctions,  Ja.  v.  3 — 0. 

•*  Polysyndeton,  or  multiplicity  of  conjunctions,  Ja.  iv.  13. 

^  What  the  ancient  critics  call  ^iiviTy\s.  St.  James  is  a  perfect  autocrat 
in  the  use  of  words.  He  abounds  in  hajiax  legomena,  or  expressions  either 
not  found  elsewhere  or  not  in  the  New  Testament.  These  are  mentioned 
in  the  notes. 

^  Ewald  arranges  it  in  seven  divisions,  followed  by  three  shorter 
paragraphs  : — 

i.  2- -18.  On  trials. 

i.  19—27.  How  we  ought  to  hear  and  do  God's  Word. 

ii.  1 — 13.  Right  behaviour  in  general. 

ii.  14 — 26.  The  relation  between  Faith  and  Works. 


24  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

to  those  who  are  suffering  trials,  he  exhorts  them  to 
endurance,  that  they  may  lack  nothing  (i.  1 — 4).  But 
if  they  lack  wisdom,  they  must  ask  God  for  it,  and 
desire  it  with  whole-heartedness  (5 — 8).  The  enemy 
of  whole-heartedness  is  often  worldly  wealth,  and  he 
therefore  tells  them  how  blessed  poverty  may  be,  and 
how  transitory  are  riches  (9 — 11).  Since  poverty  is  in 
itself  a  trial,  he  shows  the  blessedness  of  enduring  the 
trials  which  come  from  God.  But  there  are  trials 
which,  while  they  come  in  the  semblance  of  trials  from 
God,  have  their  origin  in  lust  and  their  end  death 
(12 — 15).  It  is  only  the  good  and  perfect  gifts  which 
come  from  God ;  above  all,  the  gift  of  our  birth  by  the 
Word  of  Truth  (IG — IS).  Let  them  in  meekness  and 
purity  live  worthily  of  that  AVord  of  Truth  (19 — 
21)  ;  let  them  be  doers,  and  not  mere  hearers  of  it 
(22 — 25)  ;  let  them  learn  to  distinguish  between  ex- 
ternal service  and  the  true  ritual  of  loving  unselfishness 
(26,  27). 

Then  passing  to  some  of  their  special  national 
faults,  he  first  sternly  rebukes  the  respect  of  persons, 
which  was  contrary  to  Christ's  ideal,  and  a  sin  against 
the  perfect  law  of  liberty  (ii.   1 — 13).     It  is,  perhaps, 

iii.  1 — 18.  Control  of  tlio  tongue  is  true  wisdom. 

iv.  1—12.  The  evils  of  strife. 

iv.  13 — v.  11.  Perils  of  the  rich,  and  duty  of  endurance  with  roforenco 
to  the  coiuiug  of  Christ. 

(i.)  V.  12.  Tlie  sinfulness  of  needless  oatlis. 

(ii.)  V.  Vi — 18.  The  power  of  prayer,  especially  in  siclcuess. 

(iii.)  V.  19,  20.  The  blessing  of  converting  otliors. 
The  reader  will  perhaps  think  some  of  tlie  divisions  somewhat  artificial, 
especially  as  Ewald  himself  deserihes  them.  But  there  is  nothing  sur- 
prising in  the  general  fact  tliat  a  Jewish. Christian  should  arrange  his 
work  with  some  reference  to  numericjil  symmetry ;  and  Ewald  points  out 
t^iat  tlie  numlx^r  three  prevails  in  ii.  19,  iii.  1.5,  and  the  number  seven  in 
iii.  17. 


TOPICS  OF  THE  EPISTLE.  25 

because  lie  saw  the  origin  of  this  selfish  arrogance  and 
abject  servility  in  the  reliance  which  they  placed  on 
a  nominal  orthodoxy,  that  he  enters  into  the  question 
about  faith  and  works,  to  show  that  the  former,  in  his 
sense  of  the  word,  is  dead,  and  therefore  valueless 
without  the  latter  (14—26). 

Then  he  powerfully  warns  them  against  the  sins  of 
the  tongue  in  passion  and  controversy  (iii.  1 — 12) ;  and 
to  show  that  the  loudest  and  angriest  talker  is  not  there- 
fore in  the  right,  he  draws  a  contrast  between  true  and 
false  wisdom  (13 — 18). 

The  source  of  the  evils  on  which  he  has  been 
dwelling  is  the  unbridled  lust  which  springs  from 
worldliness.  They  need  humility,  and  the  determina- 
tion to  fight  against  sin,  and  sincere  repentance  (iv. 
1 — 10),  which  will  show  itself  in  an  avoidance  of 
evil  speaking  (11,  12),  and  in  a  deeper  sense  that 
their  life  is  wholly  in  God's  disposing  hands  (13 — 
17). 

After  this  he  bursts  into  a  strong  denunciation  of 
the  rich  who  live  in  pride,  oppression,  and  self-indul- 
gence (v.  1 — 6),  while  he  comforts  the  poor,  and 
counsels  them  to  patience  (7 — 11).  Then  he  warns 
against  careless  oaths  (12),  gives  counsels  for  the  time 
of  sickness  (13 — 15),  advises  mutual  confession  of 
sins  (16),  dwells  once  more  on  the  efficacy  of  prayer,  as 
shown  in  the  example  of  Elijah  (16 — 20),  and  ends 
somewhat  abruptly  with  a  weighty  declaration  of  the 
blessedness  of  converting  others. 

V.  If  it  be  asked  what  is  the  one  predominant 
thought  in  the  Epistle,  its  one  idea  and  motive,  the 
answer  seems  to  be  neither  (as  some  have  supposed)  the 
blessedness    of    enduring   temptation — though    this    is 


V 


26  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

very  prominent  in  it ;  ^  nor  a  polemic  against  mistaken 
impressions  respecting  justification  by  faith,  though 
that  occupies  an  important  section ; "  nor  an  Ebionising 
exaltation  of  the  poor  over  the  rich,  though  the  rich 
are  sternly  warned  ;^  nor  a  contrast  between  the  friend- 
sliip  of  the  world  and  the  enmity  of  God/  Each  of 
these  topics  has  its  own  weight  and  importance,  but  to 
bring  an}'  of  them  into  exclitsive  prominence  is  to 
confuse  the  general  with  the  special.  The  general 
object,  as  is  shown  again  and  again,  is  to  impress  the 
conviction  that  Christian  faithfulness  must  express 
itself  in  the  energy  and  action  of  loving  service.^ 
"Temptations,"  indeed,  occupy  a  large  share  in  his 
thoughts,  but  he  wished  his  readers  to  try  against 
them  the  "  expulsive  power  of  good  affections."  The 
ritualism  of  active  love  and  earnestness  in  prayer  are 
with  him  the  means  of  perfection.^ 

vi.  It  is  this  object  which  gives  to  the  Epistle  its 
controversial  aspect.  St.  Paul  says  that  a  man  is  justi- 
fied by  faith  ;  St.  James,  that  he  is  justified  by  works  ; 
but  St.  James  is  using  the  word  "  faith  "  from  the 
standpoint  of  Jewish  realism,  not  of  Pauline  idealit3^ 
With  both  of  these  Apostles  the  Law  is  an  inward, 
not  an  outward  thing ;    a  principle   of   liberty,  not  a 

'  Ja.  i.  3  and  4,  virofxoiA]  ;  12,  fxaKapios  af^p,  OS  vTTOfifVfi ;  V.  7,  fxaKpoOv- 
fi-fiaaTf  oiv,  aSe\<pol  .  .  .  fxaKpodvfiaiv  ;  8,  fiaKpodv/x-fiaaTf  koI  tjueis  ;  10,  vtrSSfiy/xa 
\dPfTf   .   .    .  TTis  fxoKpodv/jtias ;    11,    viroixivovras. 

-  ii.  10—26. 

'  ii.  1—7;  iv.  1—10;  v.  1—6. 

*  iv.  4,  5  (1  J.  ii.  15 — 17),  and  ho  opposes  special  forms  of  vvorldliuess 
in  i.  2—15;  ii.  1—4;  iii.  1—18;  iv.  13,  14. 

6  i.  4,  22  ;  ii.  14—26  ;  iii.  13—17  ;  iv.  17,  &c. 

8  St.  James  dwells  on  tliis  word,  i.  3,  25  ;  iii.  2 ;  v.  4  ;  "  Tout  dans 
Tecriture  est  I'idcal  "  (,Ad.  Mouod).  He  speaks  of  prayer  in  i.  5 ;  iv.  2, 
3,  8 ;  v.  13—18. 


IDEAL   OF   ST.  JAMES.  27 

yoke  of  bondage ;  a  word  of  truth ;  a  living  im- 
pulse of  fruitful  activity  implanted  in  man.^  Seeingvy 
the  danger  of  doctrinal  formalism,  St.  James  writes  to 
counteract  its  unpractical  tendencies,  and  to  furnish  us 
— from  the  standpoint,  indeed,  of  Jewish  Christianity, 
but  still  of  an  enlightened,  liberal,  and  spiritualised 
form  of  it — the  delineation  of  the  Christian  as  he  ought 
to  be,  "as  a  perfect  man  in  the  perfection  of  the 
Christian  life,  which  can  only  be  properly  conceived  as 
a  perfect  wovky''  And  from  this  point  of  view  his 
letter  was  a  valuable  contribution  to  the  formation 
of  a  Catholic  Christianity.  There  is  nothing  harshly 
intended  in  its  statement  of  the  counter-aspect  of  the ' 
truth  which  St.  Paul  had  proclaimed.  St.  Paul  would 
himself  have  rebutted  the  one-sided  distortion  of 
his  views ;  and  he  who  opposes  one-sided  tendencies 
always  does  a  useful  work.  It  is  a  duty  of  Catholic 
Christianity  to  adjust  one  truth  with  another,  and  to 
place  apparent  contraries  in  their  position  of  proper 
equilibrium.^  It  is  inevitable — it  is  even  desirable — 
that  men  should  approach  truth  from  many  points 
of  view.  We  can  only  hope  to  gain  completeness  ^ 
of  vision  by  combining  their  separate  results.  It  is 
certain  that  we  ourselves  shall  be  more  inclined,  by 
temperament  and  training,  to  dwell  on  one  aspect  of 
truth  than  we  shall  on  others.  Yet  it  is  not  there- 
fore necessary  that  we  should  become  party  men.  It 
is  possible  to  insist  upon  party  truths  without  being 
tainted  by  party  spirit.  There  existed  at  least  three 
marked   parties   in  the   early  Christian    Church  —  the 

'   \Syos   efxipvTOs.      Ja.  i.  21. 

2  See  the  few  but  weighty  remarks  of  Baur,  Ch.  Hist.  pp.  128 — 130, 
though  he  unfortunately  denies  the  genuineness  of  the  Epistle. 


28  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

parties  of  Jewish,  of  Alexandrian,  and  of  Pauline  Chris- 
tianity. There  were  many  Christians  who  would  not 
identify  themselves  with  any  of  these  parties,  but  who 
aimed  at  being  many-sided,  conciliatory,  catholic.  IN'ow 
St.  James  stood  at  the  head  of  the  party  of  Jewish 
Christians,  though  his  followers  thrust  him  more  pro- 
minently into  this  position  than  he  would  have  himself 
desired.^  But  if  we  would  see  the  depth  of  difference 
which  separates  him  from  the  Jewish  Christians  to 
whom  the  party- view  was  everything,  and  the  common 
Christianity  was,  by  comparison,  as  nothing,  we  shall 
be  able  to  judge  of  it  by  reading  his  Epistle  side 
by  side  with  the  poisonous  innuendoes  and  rancorous 
calumnies  of  the  pseudo-Clementines.  Tlieir  polemic 
consisted  in  secretly  maligning  the  views  and  character 
of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles.  The  polemic  of  St. 
James  issued  in  the  delineation  of  the  moral  character 
of  a  Christian  man.  The  party  controversialists  only 
fostered  mutual  hatred  and  opposition ;  St.  James  drew 
so  noble  a  picture  of  Christian  faithfulness  that,  as 
has  well  been  said,  "  a  Church  which  lived  in  sincere 
accordance  with  his  lessons  would- in  no  respect  dis- 
honour the  Christian  name." 

In  proceeding  to  examine  the  Epistle  of  St.  James, 
we  shall  do  so  with  deeper  interest  if  we  bear  in  mind 
that  it  is  yet  another  appeal  of  a  great  Christian  writer 
to  Jews  and  Jewish  Christians  shortly  before  the  final 
destruction  of  their  separate  nationality.  St.  Paul  had 
shown  them  the  eternal  superiority  of  the  new  to  the 
old  covenant.  St.  Peter  had  shown  them  how  Chris- 
tianity was  the  true  kingdom,  the  royal  priesthood,  the 

>  Acts  XV.  24,  "  to  whom  wo  gave  uo  such  commandment." 


CHARACTER  OF  THE  EPISTLE.  29 

theocratic  inheritance.  Apollos,  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  had  furnished  them  with  a  masterly  proof 
that  Christians  had  the  true  priesthood,  which  could  alone 
admit  any  man  into  the  heavenly  sanctuary.  St.  James 
calls  them  to  obey  the  royal  Law,  the  law  of  liberty. 
Thus  they  had  been  shown  by  St.  Paul  and  Apollos 
that  the  rejection  of  Christianity,  or  apostasy  from  it, 
was  the  rejection  of,  or  apostasy  from,  grace  to  sin — from 
the  substance  to  the  shadow.  St.  Peter  had  warned 
them  against  murmuring  and  faithless  impatience ;  St. 
James  sternly  sets  before  them  the  perils  of  insincerity 
and  double-mindedness.  And  the  common  message  of 
all  is  that  Jews  who  had  embraced  the  faith  of  Christ 
should  hope  and  endure,  and  be  faithful  unto  the 
end. 

vii.  In  one  respect  the  Epistle  is  unique.  Alone  of 
the  twenty  Epistles  of  the  New  Testament,  it  begins 
with  no  benediction,  and  ends  with  no  message  of 
peace. ^  We  might,  perhaps,  see  in  this  fact  a  reflexion 
of  the  unbending  character  of  the  writer.  He  was  a 
man  who  in  many  respects  stood  alone,  and  whose 
manner  it  was  to  say  what  he  had  to  say  without 
formula  or  preamble,  in  the  fewest  and  simplest 
words.  The  times  demanded  sternness  and  bre^dty. 
They  resembled  the  days  which  had  called  forth  the 
sixfold  woe  of  Isaiah^  on  greed,  and  luxury,  and  un- 
belief, and  pride,  and  injustice,  and  the  reversal  of 
moral  truths ;  and  which  had  forced  him  to  end  those 


^  This  miglit  be  said  also  of  the  First  Epistle  of  St.  Joliii ;  but  that 
Epistle — eveu  if  we  do  not  accept  the  view  that  it  was  sent  to  accompany 
the  Gospel — has  no  epistolary  address,  and  is  more  of  the  nature  of  a 
treatise  than  an  Epistle. 

*  Is.  T.  1—30. 


30  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

woes  with  the  denunciation  of  terrible  retribution. 
Hollow  professions  of  religion,  empty  shows  and 
shadows  of  faith,  partiality  and  respect  of  persons, 
slavish  idolatry  of  riches,  observance  of  some  of  God's 
commandments,  together  with  open  and  impious 
defiance  of  others ;  arrogant  assumption  of  the  office 
of  religious  teaching  without  due  call  and  authority; 
encouragement  and  patronage  of  those  who  set  them- 
selves up  to  be  spiritual  guides ;  sins  of  the  tongue  ; 
evil  speaking  against  man  and  God ;  envying  and 
strife ;  factions  and  party  feuds  ;  wars  and  fightings  ; 
adulteries  ;  pride  and  revelry ;  sordid  worldliness  and 
presumptuous  self-confidence  ;  a  Babel-like  building  up 
of  secular  plans  and  projects,  independently  of  God's 
will,  and  against  it ;  vainglorious  display  of  wealth ; 
hard-heartedness  towards  those  by  whose  industry  that 
wealth  is  acquired ;  self-indulgence  and  sensuality  ;  an 
obstinate  continuance  in  that  temper  of  unbelief  which 
rejected  and  crucified  Christ ;  "  these,"  as  we  see  from 
this  Epistle,  "  were  the  sins  of  the  last  days  of  Jerusa- 
lem ;  for  these  she  was  to  be  destroyed  by  God  ;  for 
these  she  was  destroyed;  and  her  children  have  been 
scattered  abroad,  and  have  now  been  outcasts  for  near 
two  thousand  years.  .  .  .  Amid  such  circumstances, 
St.  James,  the  Apostle  and  Bishop  of  Jerusalem, 
wrote  this  Epistle — an  Epistle  of  warning  to  Jerusalem 
— the  last  warning  it  received  from  the  Holy  Spirit  of 
God.  He  thus  discharged  the  work  of  a  Hebrew 
Prophet  and  of  a  Christian  Apostle.  He  came  forth  as 
a  Christian  Jeremiah  and  a  Christian  Malachi.  A 
Jeremiah  in  denouncing  woe ;  a  Malachi  sealing  up  the 
roll  of  Divine  prophecy  to  Jerusalem :  and  not  to 
Jerusalem  only,  but  to  the  Jews  throughout  the  world, 


A   FAREWELL   VOICE.  31 

who  were  connected  with  Jerusalem  by  religious 
worship  and  by  personal  resort  to  its  great  festal  anni- 
versaries. The  Epistle  of  St.  James  is  the  farewell 
voice  of  Hebrew  prophecy."^ 

•  Bishop  Wordsworth,  whom  I  quote  the  more  gladly  because  I  disseut 
widely  from  his  exegetical  views. 


CHAPTER    XXIL 

THE    EPISTLE    OF    ST.    JAMES. 
"  Cbristianormn  omnis  religio  sine  scelere  et  macula  vivere." — Lac- 

TANTITJS. 

"  What  a  noblo  man  speaks  in  tliis  Epistle!  Deep  unbroken  patience 
in  sufferiiior !  Greatness  in  poverty  !  Joy  in  sorrow  !  Simplicity,  sincerity, 
firm  direct  confidence  in  prayer !  .  .  .  How  be  wants  action  !  Action  !  not 
words,  not  dead  faith!  " — Herdee. 

As  we  have  now  learnt  all  that  we  can  about  the 
author  of  the  Epistle,  and  the  circumstances  under 
which  he  wrote,  we  shall  be  in  a  better  position  to 
understand  rightly  his  solemn  teaching. 
"  James,  a  slave  of  God  and  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"^ 
— such  is  the  title  which  he  assumes,  and  the  only 
personal  word  in  his  entire  Epistle.^  It  was  a  simple 
title,  and  yet  in  his  eyes,  as  in  those  of  the  other 
Apostles,  nobler  than  any  other  badge  which  he 
could  adopt,  for  they  all  felt  that  they  were  "  bought 
with  a  price."     He  will  not  call  himself  an  Apostle, 

^  This  and  ii.  1  are  the  only  passages  in  which  the  names  "  Jesus  "  or 
"  Christ "  occur,  but  l)y  no  means  the  only  references  to  Him.  See  supra, 
p.  15.  Bengel  says  that  it  might  have  looked  like  pride  if  ho  had  seemed 
to  speak  too  much  of  Jesus  after  the  flesh.  The  real  solution  of  the 
matter  lies  in  the  object  and  character  of  the  Epistle.  He  does  not, 
indeed,  mention  Christ  in  bis  speech  (Acts  xv.  14 — 21);  but  that  was 
brief  and  purely  sjx'cial.  The  wording  of  ii.  1,  and  the  association  of 
Jesus  with  God  tlie  Father  in  this  verse,  clearly  sliows  that  to  St.  James 
the  Lord  was  not  the  <pi\hs  dfOponros  of  the  Ebionites ;  nor  would  Jami-s 
have  caUi'd  liiniself  "  a  slave  "  of  any  mortal  man.     See  Chrislologie,  i.  95. 

^  virip  TTuy  5f  KocrfiiKuv  U^twixa  .  .  ,  rh  SoCAoi  tlvai  Xpicrrov  KaWwin^ufievoi 
rovTo  yycipifffia  (avruv  $ov\ovTai  voifiaOeu  (CEcUluen. )  ;  Hom.  i.  1 ;  2  Pet.  i.  1, 
etc.;   1  Cor.  yi.  20;  v\l  23. 


"ADELPHOTHEOS."  33 

because  in  the  highest  technical  sense  he  is  not  an 
Apostle,  since  he  is  not  one  of  the  Twelve/  He  had  no 
need  of  any  such  title  to  command  the  attention  of 
Christians,  among  whom  he  exercised  unquestioned 
authority,  and  it  was  not  a  title  which  would  be  recog- 
nised among  the  unconverted  Jews,  whom  he  also 
desired  to  address.  Nor,  again,  will  he  call  himself 
"  a  brother  of  the  Lord."  That  was  a  claim  which 
was  thrust  into  prominence  on  his  behalf  by  others, 
but  it  is  not  one  which  he  would  himself  have  approved. 
It  reminded  him,  perhaps  painfully,  of  the  wasted 
opportunities  of  those  years  in  which  he  had  not 
believed  on  Him ;  nor  could  he  forget  with  what 
marked  emphasis  the  Lord  Jesus,  from  the  begin- 
ning of  His  public  ministry,  had  set  aside  as  of  no 
spiritual  significance  the  claims  of  fleshly  relationship.  ^ 
Of  the  Eisen,  of  the  glorified,  of  the  Eterual  Christ,  ^ 
he  was  in  no  sense  "  the  brother,"  but  "the  slave."  ^  I 
cannot  imasrine  that  he  would  have  listened  without 
indignation  to  the  name  conferred  on  him  by  the 
heated  partisanship  of  those  who  in  after  days 
called  him  "  the  brother  of  God."  The  name  would 
have  shocked  to  its  inmost  depths  the  feeling  which 
every  Jew  imbibed  from  the  earliest  training  of  his  j 
childhood  respecting  the  nothingness  of  man  and 
the  awfulness  and  unapproachable  majesty  of  God. 
He  was,  in  a  secondary  and  carnal  sense,  a  half- 
brother  of  Jesus  in  His  earthly  humiliation ;  but 
he  must  have  learnt  from  the  words  of  the  Lord 
Himself    that    this    kinsmanship    in    the    flesh   could 

^  "  The  thirteen  Apostles  were  appointed  by  the  Lord ;  St.  James,  St. 
Clemens,  and  others  by  the  Apostles"  {Apost.  Constt.  ii.  55). 
2  Rom.  i.  1 ;  2  Pet.  i.  1 ;  Jude  1. 

d 


ni  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

hardly  redeem  from  unconscious  blasphemy  a  name  so 
confusing-,  so  unwarrantable,  and  so  unscriptural,  as 
"  brother  of  God."  In  the  only  sense  in  which  the 
word  could  have  any  meaning-,  every  faithful  Christian 
was  in  all  respects  as  much  "  a  brother  of  God"  as  he. 
That  he  was,  in  common  parlance,  "a  brother  of  Him 
who  was  called  the  Christ,"  there  was  no  need  for  him 
to  mention.  It  was  a  fact  known  to  every  Jew  of  the 
Dispersion  who  visited  Jerusalem  at  the  yearly  feasts, 
and  it  even  stands  as  a  description  of  St.  James  on  the 
indifferent  page  of  the  Jewish  historian. 

"  To  the  twelve  tribes  that  are  in  the  Dispersion,^ 
giving  them  joy."^  The  ten  tribes  had,  as  a  body, 
been  indistinguishably  lost  among  the  nations  into 
whose  countries  they  had  been  transplanted ;  ^  but 
there  were  probably  some  communities,  and  certainly 
many  families,  which  had  preserved  their  genealogy, 
and  still  took  pride  in  the  thought  that  they  belonged 
to  this  or  that  tribe  of  ancient  Israel.*  And  the 
nation  never  lost  the  sense  of  its  ideal  unity.  The 
number  "  twelve  "  was  to  the  Jews  a  symbolic  number. 

'  See  Life  and  Work  of  St.  Paul,  i.  115  seq.  The  word  Diaspora  occurs 
in  John  vii.  35 ;  1  Pet.  i.  1 ;  and  in  the  LXX.  of  Ps.  cxlvi.  2 ;  Deut. 
xxviii.  25. 

*  See  infra,  p.  36. 

*  Dean  Plumptro  points  out  that  the  first  appearance  of  the  fiction  that 
the  Ten  Ti'ibos  were  soniewliere  preserved  as  one  body  is  in  2  Esdr.  xiii. 
39 — 47,  where  the  author  kiys  that,  in  the  determination  to  keep  their  own 
statutes,  "  they  took  this  counsel  among  themselves,  that  they  would  leave 
the  multitude  of  the  heathen,  and  go  forth  into  a  farther  country,  where 
never  mankind  dwelt."  The  Talmud  recognises  their  entire  dispersion. 
Thus  Raljbi  Ashe  said,  "  If  a  Gentile  should  betroth  a  Jewess,  the  betrothal 
may  not  now  l)e  invalid,  for  he  may  be  a  descendant  of  one  of  the  Ten 
Tribes,  and  so  of  the  seed  of  Israel "  (Yevamoth,  f.  16,  b).  Again,  "  the 
Ten  Tribes  will  never  be  restored  (Deut.  xxviii.  25)  ...  so  says  R. 
Akhiva  "  (Sanhedrin,  f.  110,  b). 

*  E.g.,  the  widow  Anna,  who  was  of  the  tribe  of  Asher. 


THE    TWELVE    TRIBES.  35 

"  Three"  was  to  them  the  sacred  number,  the  number 
of  Spirit,  the  number  of  the  life  that  is  in  God; 
"■four "  was  the  number  which  symbolised  Divine 
Providence  ;  "  twelve "  (4x3)  was  tlie  number  of 
Heavenly  completeness,  the  number  of  the  consumma- 
tion of  the  Kingdom  of  God/  Hence  St.  Paul  also 
speaks  of  "  the  dodekaphulon,''  ^  our  "  twelve-tribed 
nation,"  and  St.  John,  in  the  Apocalypse,  echoes  in 
various  forms ^  the  conception  of  the  Elect  of  the  Twelve 
Tribes  in  Heaven  which  had  been  involved  in  the  promise 
of  Christ,  "  Ye  also  shall  sit  upon  twelve  thrones  judg- 
ing the  Twelve  Tribes  of  Israel."* 

It  is  a  curious  and  undesigned  coincidence  that  this 
letter,  and  the  encyclical  letter  from  the  Church  of 
Jerusalem,  of  which  St.  James  was  the  main  author, 
are  the  only  two  Christian  letters  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment which  begin  with  the  greeting  "  giving  them 
joy."^  It  was  distinctively  the  Greek  salutation.  The 
Jewish  was  Shalom — "  Peace."  ^  St.  Paul,  wishing  to 
combine  in  his  salutations  all  that  was  most  blessed 
alike  in  ethnic  and  in  spiritual  life,  combines  the  two 
national  methods  of  salutation  in  his  %«pt<?  x^l  elp'qvTj^ 
"  grace  and  peace,"  which  in  his  pastoral  Epistles  is 
tenderly  amplified  into  "  grace,  mercy,  and  peace." 

^  See  Herzog,  Real.  Encycl.,  s.  v.  Zahlen  ;  Lange,  Apocalypse,  Introd., 
§  6,  a. 

^  Acts  xxvi.  7. 

3  12  tribes  ;  24  elders  ;  12,000  of  each  tribe  ;  144,000  of  the  followers 
of  the  Lamb,  etc.  The  latter  number  is  so  far  from  being  narrowly 
restrictive,  that  it  stands  for  a  number  ideally  complete. 

*  Matt.  xix.  28 ;  Rev.  vii.  5—8. 

^  Acts  XV.  23,  xa^pe'"-  The  word  also  occurs  in  the  Greek  letter  of 
Claudius  Lysias  to  Felix  (Acts  xxiii.  26),  and  in  that  of  Antiochus  in 
2  Mace.  ix.  19.  Its  recurrence  here  is  one  of  the  undesigned  coincidences 
between  this  letter  and  the  account  given  of  St.  James  in  the  Acts. 

®  Is.  xlviii.  22;  Ivii.  21,  where  Shalom  is  rendered  xo'V*'"  by  the  LXX. 

d  2 


36  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

I  have  here  rendered  the  word  by  "  giving  them 
joy  "^  because  it  forms  the  transition  to  the  opening 
passage,  "My  brethren,  count  it  all  joy."  This  mode 
of  transition  by  the  repetition  of  a  word — which  is 
technically  known  as  duadiplosis — is  very  characteristic 
of  this  Epistle,  and  forms,  in  fact,  the  writer's  ordinary 
method  of  passing  from  one  paragraph  to  another. - 
The  remainder  of  the  chapter — the  phraseology  of  which 
I  will  endeavour  to  elucidate  in  the  notes,  and  the 
general  bearing  in  the  text — runs  as  follows  : — 

"  Count  it  all  joy,3  my  brethren,*  when  ye  suddenly  fall  into 
varied  temptations,''  recognising  that  the  testing  of  your  faith^  works 
endurance ;  but  let  endurance  have  a  perfect  work,^  that  ye  may  be 
perfect  and  complete,  lacking  nothing  **  (i.  2 — 4). 

"  But  if  any  one  of  you  lacks  wisdom,^  let  him  ask  from  God,  who 

'  Comp.  2  John  10,  11.  Tlie  absence  of  any  opening'  benediction  may 
be  due  to  the  general  character  of  the  letter. 

'■^  Thus  we  have  ver.   1,  x^^pf'" ;  ver.  2,  x'tp"" ;  inroixoirriv,  vor.  3,  t}  5e 

inrofioin] ;    ver.  4,  \etir6ftii/oi,   ver.  5,  ft  5e  tjs  Kflirerai ;    ver.  6,  /irjSev  StaKpiv6fifV0! 
6  yap  5iaKptv6ixfvos,  &c. ;  and  so  throughout. 

3  Ttaaav  x^po")  irierum  gaudium,  eitel  Freude.  Comp.  Luke  vi.  22,  23 ; 
Acts  V.  41 ;  Col.  i.  24. 

*  The  perpetual  recurrence  of  this  word  shows  that  the  wounds  which 
St.  James  inflicts  are  meant  to  be  the  faithful  wounds  of  a  friend. 

•'  irepnrea-riTe  of  sudden  accidents,  as  Ktiffrcus  vepie-ireaev,  Luke  X.  30 ; 
iTepnrfff6vres  Sf  els  rdiroi/  SiOd\aaaoy.  The  word  ■irolKi\os  literally  means 
"  many-coloured."  Comp.  ^Triduixtais  iroiKiXais,  1  Tim.  iii.  6.  The  word 
"  temptations "  includes  all  forms  of  trial :  Luke  xxii.  28 ;  Acts  xx.  li>. 
Persecution  was  rife  at  this  time  :  1  Thess.  ii.  14 ;  Heb.  xi.  32,  33. 

*'  Verse  3,  rh  SoKi^iov  vfj.S>v  rris  irlarews.     St.  Peter  (1  Pet.  i.  7)  uses 
the  same  plirase,  and  the  coincidence  can  hardly  be  accidental. 
"   Matt.  xxiv.  13  —  6  6i  inrofulvai  els  rtKos  ffwdrtaerai. 

8  "  The  work  of  God,"  says  Alford,  "  in  a  man  is  the  man."  The 
word  reKfios  is  a  favourite  one  with  St.  James  (i.  3,  4,  17,  25 ; 
ill.  2),  borrowed,  doubtless,  from  the  words  of  our  Lord  (Matt.  v.  48; 
xix.  21).  '0\6K\r}poi  is  also  used  by  St.  Paul  (1  Thess.  v.  28),  and  means 
"well  regulated  in  every  part"  (Acts  iii.  16).  Philo  and  Josephus  use  it 
for  unblemished  sacrificial  victims. 

^  "  Wisdom  "  with  St.  James  is  evidently  that  practical  wisdom  which 
surpasses  knowledge  {yyuffis),  because  it  not  only  knows  truth,  but  acts 


EPISTLE    OF    ST.    JAMES.  37 

giveth  to  all  simply'  and  upbraideth  not,^  and  it  shall  be  given 
him^  (5). 

"  But  let  him  ask  in  faith,*  nothing  doubting,*  for  he  that  doubteth 
is  like  a  wave  of  the  sea  -wind-driven"  and  tossed  about.  For  let  not 
that  person  think  that  he  shall  receive  anything^  from  the  Lord — a 
double-minded  man,*  unsettled  in  all  his  ways^  (6 — 8). 

upon  that  knowledge  {Etym.  Magn.).  Comp.  iii.  15 — 17;  1  Cor.  xii.  8; 
Col.  ii.  3. 

1  airXws.     So  in  Rom.  xii.  8  we  are  bidden  to  grow  in  "  simplicity." 

-  The  meaning  of  this  expression  is  best  seen  from  Ecclus.  xx.  15, 
where  it  is  said  of  the  fool,  "  He  giveth  little,  and  upbraideth  miich ;  he 
openeth  his  mouth  like  a  crier ;  to-day  he  lendeth,  and  to-morrow  he  will 
ask.  Such  an  one  is  to  be  hated  of  God  and  man;"  Id.  xii.  22,  "After 
thou  hast  given,  upbraid  not"  {fiii  ovelSiCf).  The  "  exprohratio  benefici" 
(Ter.  Andr.  i.  1) — i.e.,  the  casting  in  the  teeth  of  others  what  we  have 
done  for  them — is  a  vice  of  all  ages. 

^  See  1  Kings  iii.  11,  12,  "  Because  thou  hast  asked  this  thing 
t wisdom),  behold,  I  have  done  according  to  thy  word,"  Luke  xi.  13; 
Ecclus.  vii.  10,  "  Be  not  fainthearted  when  thou  makest  thy  prayer."  We 
see  here  that  by  "  faith  "  St.  James  means  undivided  confidence  in  God. 

*  See  V.  15 ;  Matt.  xxi.  22,  "  All  things  whatsoever  ye  ask  in  prayer, 
believing,  ye  shall  receive." 

^  AioKpivo/xevos,  Matt.  xxi.  21,  "  If  ye  have  faith  and  doubt  not 
(/i^  SiaKpiOriTi),  ye  shall  do  not  only  the  miracle  of  the  fig-tree,  but,"  &c. ; 
Rom.  iv.  20,  Abi-aham  ov  ^nKpldn  zfj  dirto-r/a.  "  When  faith  says  '  yes ' 
and  unbelief  says  '  no,' "  says  Huther,  "  to  doubt  (SiaKpiveffdai)  is  the 
union  of  '  yes  '  and  '  no,'  but  so  that  '  no  '  is  the  weightier.  The  deep- 
lying  ground  of  it  is  pride."     Dean  Plumptre  quotes  from  Tennyson — 

"  Faith  and  unfaith  can  ne'er  be  equal  powers, 
Unfaith  in  aught  is  want  of  faith  in  all." 

**  a.vetii^ofjLfU(f  'koI  ^nn(ofiiVip.  The  words  occur  here  only,  and  kKvSchv 
("billow")  only  in  Luke  viii.  24;  but  we  have  the  metaphor  in 
Is.  Ivii.  20 ;  Eph.  iv.  14.  The  words  well  express  the  state  of  tumultuous 
excitement  which  preceded  the  Jewish  War. 

"  That  is,  "  any  special  answer  to  prayer." 

^  'AvTjp  Sl\pvxos.  "  The  man  who  has  two  souls  in  conflict  with  each  other." 
This  striking  expi'ession  occurs  only  at  iv.  8.  Rabbi  Tanchum  (/.  84) 
on  Deut.  xxvi.  17  gives  a  close  parallel,  "  Let  not  those  who  pray  have 
two  hearts,  one  directed  to  God,  one  to  something  else."  Comp.  1  Kings 
xviii.  21;  Ps.  xii.  2,  "a  double  heart"  {lit.  "a  heart  and  a  heart"); 
Ecclus.  i.  28,  "  Come  not  unto  the  Lord  with  a  double  heart ;  "  Is.  ii.  12, 
"  Woe  be  to  .  .  .  the  sinner  that  goeth  two  ways  ;"  Matt.  vi.  24,  "  No 
man  can  serve  two  masters."  The  passage  is  imitated  in  "  The  Shepherd 
of  Hermas  "  {Mandat.  ix.). 

^  'AKaTciffTaTos.     A  classical  expression  (again)  found  only  in  St.  James 


38  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

"  But  let  the  humble  brother  glory  in  his  exaltation,  but  tlie  rich 
in  his  humiliation,'  because  as  the  flower  of  the  grass  he  shall  pass 
away.^  For  the  sun  ariseth  with  the  burning  wind,  and  drieth  the 
grass,  and  its  flower  fadeth  away,  and  the  beauty  of  its  aspect 
perisheth  ;'  so  also  shall  the  rich  man  fade  away  in  his  goings* 
(9-11). 

"  Blessed  is  the  man^  who  endureth  temptation,  for  when  he  has 
been  approved  he  shall  receive  the  garland  of  the  life®  which  He 
promised^  to  those  who  love  Him^  (12). 

"  Let  no  one  who  is  being  tempted  say,  '  I  am  being  tempted 
from  God.'     For  God  is  out  of  the  sphere  of  evils,*  and  Himself 

(iii.  8).  Comp.  Is.  liv.  11,  "  tossed  with  tempest;"  'AKaTao-Too-Zo,  iii.  16 ; 
Luke  xxi.  9 ;  1  Cor.  xiv.  33,  &c.  It  is  one  who  "  never  contiuueth  in  one 
stay"  (Job  xiv.  2). 

1  For  the  different  views  taken  of  this  verse  see  infra,  p.  43. 
KavxaffOou  is  literally  "  to  boast."     Rom.  ii.  17,  &c. 

^  For  the  metaphor,  specially  suitable  to  the  brief  life  of  flowers  in  the 
scorcliing  heat  of  Palestine,  see  Is.  xl.  6,  7 ;  Ps.  cii.  15 ;  Job.  xiv.  2 ; 
1  Pet.  i.  24 ;  "Wisd.  ii.  12,  "  Let  us  crown  ourselves  with  rosebuds  before 
they  be  withered;"  riches  are  no  "uuwithering  inheritance  "  (1  Pet.  i.  4) 
as  the  kingdom  of  God  is. 

^  Tlie  aorist  tenses  show  us  the  whole  story,  so  to  speak.  The  kauson 
is  usually  taken  to  mean  the  hadim.,  or  simoom,  as  in  Jonah  iv.  8 ;  the 
"  east  wiud  "  of  Ezek.  xvii.  10 ;  xix.  12 ;  "  tlie  wind  of  the  Lord  from 
the  wilderness "  of  Hos.  xiii.  15 ;  but  may  mean  merely  "  scorching 
heat ;"  Matt.  xx.  12  ;  Luke  xii.  55. 

*  ^apavdi](rfTai  ouly  iu  Wisd.  ii.  8  and  Job  xv.  30  (LXX.).  ■Kopelaa  is 
the  best-supported  reading,  and  alludes,  perhaps,  to  travels  for  purposes 
of  gain,  &c.  (iv.  13).     (A,  Tropicus,  "gettings.") 

^  av^p—"  non  mollis  nee  effeminatus  sed  vir"  (Thos.  Aquin.). 

"  There  is  no  special  reference  to  athletes  (Ps.  xxi.  3 ;  Rev.  ii.  10 ; 
Wisd.  V.  16). 

^  The  "  He  "  (as  in  n.  A,  B)  is  more  emphatic  than  if  he  had  inserted 
"  the  Lord.''  and  .seems  to  show  how  early  the  Talmudic  method  of 
reference  liad  liegun. 

*  Amor  parit  patientiam  (Bengel). 

8  inrdpaaros  occurs  here  only.  It  means  (1)  "  untempted,"  and  (2) 
"  one  who  does  not  tempt."  Luther  follows  the  Vulgate  in  understanding 
it  to  mean  "  does  not  try  evil  men  "  {intentator  malorutn  est),  or  "  is  not  a 
tempter  of  yvell  things  "  (Wiclif ) ;  but  this  St.  James  has  said  already. 
It  .seems  to  mean  "  has  nothing  to  do  with  e\'il  things,"  and  therefore 
cannot  tempt  men  to  evil.  (Ecumenius  quotes  a  heathen  saying,  "  Tlie 
Divine  neither  suffers  troubles  nor  causes  th(»m  to  others."  "  Why,  then, 
is  it  said  that  God  did  tempt  Abraham  iu  Greu.  xix.  3  P     That  means  that 


EPISTLE    OF    ST.    JAMES.  39 

tempteth  no  one,  but  each  is  ever  tempted  when  he  is  being  drawn 
forth'  and  enticed  by  his  own  desire.^  Then  the  desire,  having  con- 
ceived, bears  sin ;  but  sin,  when  full  grown,  brings  forth  death 
(13—15).^ 

"  Be  not  deceived,  my  brethren  beloved.  Every  good  giving 
and  every  perfect  gift*  is  from  above,  descending  from  the  Father  of 
the  Lights,^  with  whom  there  is  no  varying  nor  shadow  of  turning.  ^ 

He  tried  Abraham,  not  from  evil  motives  to  au  evil  end,  but  from  good 
motives  to  a  good  end  "  (Aug.). 

^  Prov.  XXX.  13  (LXX.).  The  word  may  be  used  of  "dragging  a 
prey  to  land,"  as  in  Hdt.  ii.  76,  and  so  we  might  take  the  metaphor  to  be 
one  from  fishing.  The  word  5e\eaC6iJ.eyos  may  also  mean  "  enticing  with 
a  bait,"  as  in  2  Pet.  ii.  14,  18 ;  Xen.  Mem.  ii.  1,  §  6.  But  the  further 
expansion  of  the  metaphor  shows  that  he  is  thinking  of  the  enticement  of 
the  harlot  Sense  (Prov.  vii.  16 — 23),  to  which  in  classical  and  Hellenistic 
usage  the  words  are  equally  applicable  (Hom.  Od.  it.  294 ;  Arist.  Polit. 
V.  10 ;  Testam.  XII.  Patriarch,  p.  702) ;  and  especially  Plutarch's  De  Ber. 
Nun.  Vindict. ;  "  the  sweetness  of  desire,  like  a  bait  (Se'Aeap),  entices 
(i^(\Kei)  men." 

2  "  No  man  taketh  harm  but  by  himself;"  "passion  becomes  to  each 
his  own  God;"  " sibi  cuique  Deus  fit  dira  cupido  "  (Virg.  ^n.  ix.  185). 

^  Milton  expands  the  metaphor  into  an  allegory  in  Par.  Lost,  ii.  745 —  , 

814.     Lange  points  out  the  vai7ing  expressions  of  the  New  Testament :     ^^ 
"  Sin  brings  forth  death  "  (James) ;  "  death  is  the  wages  of  sin  "  (Paul) ;  ^ 
"  sin  is  death  "  (John). 

*  This  forms  in  the  original  a  perfect  hexameter,  except  that  the  last 
syllable  of  B6<ns  is  lengthened — 

irScra  S6ais  ayadri   Kcd  irav  Sccpr]iJ.a  reXeiov. 

On  these  metrical  phrases  see  note  on  Heb.  xii.  14.  Swprifia  only  occurs  in 
Rom.  V.  16.  "  From  above  "  (John  iii.  3,  7, 31 ;  xix.  11).  Bishop  Andrewes, 
in  two  sermons  on  this  text,  says  the  56<ris  ayadr]  refers  to  the  gifts  of  eternal 
life  ;  the  Sdpvua  TeXeiov  the  treasures  laid  up  for  us  in  eternity. 

^  By  "  the  lights "  is  meant  probably  "  the  heavenly  bodies,"  as  in 
Ps.  cxxxvi.  7 ;  Jer.  iv.  23,  called  in  Gen  i.  14  (pcocrrripe^,  which  is  meta- 
phorically applied  to  Christians  (John  v.  35  ;  Phil.  ii.  15).  The  "  Father  " 
then  means  the  Creator  (eorap.  Job  xxxviii.  28,  "Hath  the  rain  a 
father  ? ").  Some  explain  it  of  angels  and  spirits,  and  of  Him  who  is 
the  "  Light  of  the  world "  (John  ix.  5).  But  the  question  is  not  what 
meaning  the  words  may  be  made  to  include,  but  what  meaning  they 
originally  had. 

'  The  words  are  curious — trapaWayT)  %  rpowris  airocrKlaa-txa.  The  first 
word  is  a  hapax  legotnenon  in  the  New  Testament  (but  see  2  Kings  ix.  20. 
IjXX.),  and  has  been  understood  to  be  a  technical  term  of  astronomy,  like 
parallax.     But  in  Epictet.  i.  14  it  merely  means  "  change,"  even  in  an 


40  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

Because  He  willed  it,  He  brought  us  forth  by  the  word  of  truth  that 
we  might  be  in  some  sense'  a  first  fruit  of  His  creatures'  (16 — 18). 

"  Ye  know,^  my  brethren  beloved.  But  let  everyone  be  swift 
to  listening,  slow  to  speaking,*  slow  to  wrath.  For  the  wrath  of  a 
man  (^avSphs")  worketh  not  the  righteousness  of  God.  Therefore  laying 
aside  all  filthiness  and  superfluity  of  malice,  receive  in  meekness  the 
implanted  word  which  is  able  to  save  your  souls.'^  But  prove  your- 
selves doers  of  the  word,  and  not  hearers  only,  misleading  youreelves 
(Col.  ii.  4  ;  Luke  xi.  28).  For  if  any  one  is  a  hearer  of  the  word,  and 
not  a  doer,  this  person  is  like  a  man"  contemplating  the  face  of  his 
birth  in  a  mirror.  For  he  contemplated  himself,  and  has  gone 
away,'^  and  immediately  forgot  what  kind  of  person  he  was.  But 
he  who  has  stooped  down  to  gaze*  into  a  perfect  law,  the  law  of 

astronomical  sentence;  and  Plotiuus  speaks  of  "a  change  (irapaWayii)  of 
days  to  nights."  It  seems,  however,  to  have  a  semi-technical  couuexion 
with  astronomy.  'hiroaKiaana  is  also  a  hapax  legomenon,  and  rpoxol  ijKlov 
means  *'  the  solsticL's  "  (see  Job  xxxviii.  33).  Here,  however,  there  seems 
to  be  a  general  allusion  to  the  changes  and  revolutions  of  the  sun,  moon, 
and  stars  (Wisd.  vii.  17—19),  as  compared  mth  the  sun  which  never  sots. 
Comp.  1  John  i.  5,  "God  is  light,  and  in  Him  is  no  darkness  at  all;" 
Ps.  cxxxix.  11. 

1  a.Trapxi\v.     The  riva  shows  that  he  is  using  a  new  metaphor. 

-  On  the  great  theological  imjwrtance  of  this  verse — all  the  more 
noticeable  because  the  Epistle  is  predominantly  practical — see  infra,  p.  48. 

^  The  true  reading  seems  to  be  lart,  A,  B,  C  (Heb.  xii.  17 ;  Eph.  v.  5). 
Its  very  abruptness  probably  caused  the  variations  of  the  MSS. 

*  Ecclus.  V.  11  :  "  Be  swift  to  hear  ....  and  with  patience  give 
answer;"  "  Thou  hast  two  ears  and  one  mouth  "  (Riickert).  (Ecimienius 
here  quotes  the  proverb  that  "  no  one  ever  repented  of  having  been  silent," 
and  every  one  will  be  reminded  of  the  proverb,  "  Speech  is  silvern.  Silence 
is  golden  "  (Prov.  xiii.  3,  &c. ;  Eccl.  v.  2) — Philo  has  the  phrase,  "slow  to 
benefit,  swift  to  injure."  The  Jews  were  ever  "  slow  to  hear  "  (Heb.  v. 
11 ;  X.  25). 

*  It  is  able,  for  it  is  a  power  of  God  (Rom.  i.  16).  Without  it  they  are 
unable,  whether  by  outward  works  (as  Pharisees  said)  or  l)y  detormiuation 
of  will  (as  Sadducees  said)  to  be  saved.     On  en<pvTos,  see  p.  49. 

6  av^p\.  Some  have  referred  tlio  term  to  the  comparative  carelessness 
of  men  in  looking  at  mirrors  (1  Cor.  xiii.  12;  Wisd.  vii.  26;  Ecclus.  xii. 
12),  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  St.  James  iut^'uds  any  special  distinctive- 
ness in  the  word  (see  vers.  8  —12). 

''  a.ir(\-n\v9iv,  perf.     The  tenses  make  tlio  image  more  graphic. 

8  The  true  meaning  of  tlie  word  will  be  seen  !)y  a  reference  to  Luko  xxiv. 
12 — "Stooping  down  and  looking  in";  Ecclut*.  xiv.  23;  John  xx.  5,  11  ; 
1  Pot.  i.  12  (see  the  note  on  that  verse).      Doubtless  St.  Jaiucs  thought, 


EPISTLE    OF    ST.    JAMES.  41 

liberty/  and  has  stayed  to  gaze,^  proving  himself  not  a  hearer  who 
foi'gets,  but  a  doer  who  works,  he  shall  be  blessed  in  his  doing^ 
(19—25). 

"If  any  one  fancies  that  he  is  'religious '4  while  he  is  not 
bridling  his  tongue  (iii.  2,  3),  but  is  deceiving  his  own  heart,  this 
man's  religious  service  is  profitless.  A  religious  service  pure  and 
undefiled*  before  our  God  and  Father  is  this — to  take  care  of  orphans 
and  widows  in  their  affliction  (Ex.  xxii.  22 — 24  ;  Acts  vi.  1),  to  keep 
himself  unspotted  from  the  world"*'  (26,  27). 

iu  passing,  of  the  Cherubim  bending  down  over  the  Ark  as  though  to 
gaze  continually  on  the  revelation  of  God's  will  in  the  moral  law.  See 
on  this  word  Coleridge  {Aids  to  Reflection,  p.  15),  "  A  more  happy  and 
forcible  word  could  not  have  been  chosen  to  express  the  nature  and  ulti- 
mate object  of  reflection." 

^  "  Legum  servi  sumus  ut  liberi  esse  possimus  "  (Cic).  We  have  seen 
already  that  St.  James's  ideal  of  the  Law  is  not  that  of  Moses  (Acts  xv. 
10 ;  Gal.  V.  1,  but  comp.  Ps.  xix.  8 — 11),  but  that  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  (ii.  8 ;  v.  12 ;  John  viii.  32),  the  law  of  the  Spirit  (Rom.  viii.  2), 
the  law  of  faith  (Rom.  iii.  27). 

^  Notice  the  antithesis,  irapaKvxf/as,  irapa/xe (vas,  oliK  aKpoar^s  ii:i\7\<T^oa\iVT]s, 
as  against  KarevSricrev,  ainA^AvBev,   eireXdOeTO. 

^  "  Ut  ipsa  actio  sit  beatitudo  "  (Sclmeckenburger). 

*  @pT]aKe(a  means  ritual  service,  external  observance  ;  "  gay  religions,  fuU 
of  pomp  and  gold"  (Acts  xxvi.  5),  which  (as  we  see  from  Col.  ii.  18, 
tlie  only  other  place  where  the  word  occurs  in  the  New  Testament)  have 
a  perpetual  tendency  to  degenerate  into  superfluous  and  self-satisfying 
human  ordinances  {ide\odpri<TKela),  and  even,  to  use  the  bold  coinage  of 
a  later  writer,  idiKoireptfforodprjffKela.  It  is  the  perd  and  disease  of  the  ex- 
ternally virtuous — vice  corrupting  virtue  itself  into  pride  and  intolerance. 
Hence  the  dprjffKos  is  one  who  plumes  himself  on  his  outward  service. 
This  paragraph  illustrates  the  "  slowness  to  speak,"  as  the  last  did  the 
"  swiftness  to  hear."  Obti'usiveness  in  talk  is  a  natural  consequence  of 
a  spurious  religion. 

^  The  Jewish  notion  of  defilement  was  very  different  (John  xviii.  28 ; 
Lev.  V.  3,  and  passim ;  comp.  Ecclus.  xxxv.  14).  For  "  the  fatherless  and 
widows  "  (where  "  respect  of  persons  "  is  also  alluded  to),  and  for  the 
general  thought,  compare  Mark  vii.  20 — 23  ;  Luke  xi.  40. 

"  St.  James  woidd  feel  tliis  duty  all  the  more  keenly,  and  would  feel 
that  this,  and  not  the  performance  of  outward  religious  duties  was  what 
God  really  desired,  because  the  day  had  been  when  he  too  was  of  the  world, 
for  which  reason  the  world  which  hated  Christ  had  not  hated  him  (John 
vii.  7).  By  "  the  woi'ld  "  is  here  meant  everything  in  the  world,  and  in 
tlie  worldly  life  which  tempts  to  sin  (1  Tim.  vi.  14).  With  this  thought 
compare  John  xvii.  15 ;  1  Tim.  v.  22.     With  the  general  thought  of  the 


42  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

I  have  broken  the  chapter  into  brief  sections  to 
indicate  as  far  as  possible  the  transitions  of  thought. 
Special  difficulties  of  expression  are,  I  hope,  sufficiently 
elucidated  in  the  appended  notes,  and  the  very  literal 
translation  will  show  what  I  believe  to  be  the  best 
reading  and  construction.  But  there  are  one  or  two 
general  points  in  the  chapter  which  require  notice. 

i.  It  will  be  observed  that  St.  James  begins  at  once 
with  the  subject  of  temptation,  using  the  word  in  its 
broadest  sense  of  all  forms  of  trial.  It  includes  both 
outward  persecution — from  which  the  Churches  of  scat- 
tered Jews,  whether  converted  or  unconverted,  were 
always  liable,  from  the  common  hatred  which  Pagans 
felt  for  them — and  those  inward  temptations  which  are 
often  closely  connected  with  outward  circumstances. 
St.  James  shows  his  readers  how  to  turn  these  tempta- 
tions into  blessings,  by  making  them  a  source  of  patient 
endurance,  and  so  using  them  as  the  fire  which  purges 
and  tests  the  fine  gold.  For  the  Christian  should  aim 
at  such  perfection  ^  (i.  2 — 4). 

ii.  Now  for  perfection  he  needs  wisdom^  most  of  all ; 
and  if  he  lacks  this  wisdom  he  has  only  to  ask  for  it 
from  One  whose  gifts  are  absolute  and  gracious  (i.  5). 

iii.  Yet  it  is  useless  to  ask  without  faith  in  Him  to 


paragraph  comp.  Ecclus.  xxxv.  2  :  "  He  that  requiteth  a  good  turn,  offoreth 
lirie  Hour;  aud  he  that  giveth  alms,  sacrificeth  praise."  The  same  thouglit 
is  found  both  in  Scripture  (Dent.  x.  12 ;  Ps.  xl.  7  ;  xxi.  17  ;  1  Sam.  xv.  22  ; 
Mic.  vi.  6 — 9  ;  Hos.  vi.  6  ;  xii.  6,  &c.)  and  in  heathen  writers. 

'  The  Cliristian  aims  at  "  endurance,"  not  at  "  apatliy,"  as  the  Stoic 
did.  His  cndunince  has  "  a  sublimer  origin,  a  milder  character,  a  greater 
duration,  a  more  glorious  fruit  "  (Van  Oosterzee). 

-  The  history  of  the  next  few  years  shows  how  deeply  the  Jews  needed 
this  wisdom.  "Wisdom  is  justified  of  her  children"  (Matt.  xi.  19);  — 
"  and  she  abode  not  at  Jerusalem,  but  with  the  Christians  who  fled  in 
time  to  Pella." 


RICH    AND    POOR.  43 

whom  the  petition  is  addressed,  and  without  faith  that 
it  will  he  granted.  Such  faithless  prayers  can  only 
arise  from  a  wavering-  disposition,  a  want  of  stability, 
a  want  of  whole -heartedness,  a  dualism  of  life  and 
aim  (i.  6 — 8). 

iv.  Then  comes  an  apparently  sudden  transition  of 
exhortation  to  rich  and  poor.^  That  the  transition  was 
not  so  sudden  in  the  mind  of  the  writer  is  shown  by  his 
connecting  particle.  "  The  man  of  two  souls,"  he  says, 
"  is  restless  in  all  his  ways  ;  hut  let  the  humble  brother 
rejoice."  The  unexpressed  connexion  seems  to  be, 
"  Now,  what  is  the  cause  of  this  spiritual  distraction 
and  instability  ?  Does  it  not  arise  from  worldliness  ? 
Well,  ye  cannot  serve  God  and  Mammon.  If,  then,  any 
brother  he  poor  and  humble,  let  him  rejoice  in  his 
exaltation.  For  if  he  take  it  rightly  his  earthly 
humiliation  is  his  true  dignity.  He  is  enjoying  the 
beatitude  of  poverty.  It  is  something  like  the  thought 
expressed  so  tersely  by  our  great  philosopher,^  "  Pros- 
perity is  the  blessing  of  the  Old  Testament,  Adversity 
is  the  blessing  of  the  New"  (i.  9). 

V,  "But  the  rich,"  he  adds,  "in  his  humiliation." 
The  meaning  of  these  words  is  not  clear.  It  has  even 
been  supposed  by  some  that  the  words  "  rich "  and 
"  poor"  are  used  in  this  Epistle  in  a  metaphorical  sense.^ 

'  So  in  Shemoth  Rabba  (§  31,  /.  129)  we  find,  "Blessed  is  the  man 
who  stands  in  his  temptation  ;  for  there  is  no  man  whom  God  does  not  try. 
He  tries  the  rich,  to  see  if  they  will  open  their  hands  to  the  poor ;  He 
tries  the  poor,  to  see  if  they  will  not  murmur,"  &c. 

^  Lord  Bacon. 

'  Lange  thinks  that  by  "  the  brethren  of  low  degree  "  are  meant  Jews 
and  Jewish  Christians,  and  by  the  rich  the  Gentiles  ;  for,  he  says,  the  rich 
Jews  have  always  been  kind  to  the  poor.  I  think  I  have  already  met  this 
difficulty.  It  is  surely  extravagant  to  say  that  "the  rich  man  with  a 
gold  ring  and  splendid   garment  denotes   the   proud   Ebiouitish  Jewish 


44  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

Another  discussion  turns  on  the  question  whether  by  "the 
rich  "  we  are  here  to  understand  rich  Christians,  or  rich 
Jews  and  Gentiles.  I  feel  convinced  that  the  words  are 
to  be  understood  in  their  primary  meaning.  As  I  have 
already  explained,  St.  James  is  not  thinking  of  Gentiles 
at  all,  and  is  drawing  no  marked  distinction  between 
Jews  and  Christians.  A  further  question  is,  are  we  to 
understand  this  phrase  hortatively  in  the  sense  of  "  but 
let  the  rich  man  boast  in  his  humiliation,"  or  as  a  con- 
trast, "  but  the  rich  man  rejoices  or  glories  in  that  which 
is  in  reality  his  humiliation"?^  In  the  one  case  it  is  an 
exhortation  to  the  rich  man  as  to  what  he  ovght  to  do  ; 
in  the  other  a  censure  upon  him  for  what  he  does. 
Neither  interpretation  is  without  difficulty,  but  on 
the  whole  the  meaning  seems  to  be  that  worldliness, 
with  the  temptations  which  it  brings,  is  full  of  dan- 
gers. Poverty  and  riches  stand  in  God's  estimation  in 
reverse  positions.  Humble  poverty  is  true  wealth. 
Pampered  wealth  is  real  poverty.^  Let  the  poor  brother 
glory  in  the  beatitude  of  povert}^ ;  it  is  a  gift  of  God. 
The  rich  brother,  then,  is  worse  off,  is  in  a  worse 
position,  than  he — his  riches  are  his  humiliation  in  the 
heavenly  order,  for  they  are  a  temptation  to  which  he 
is  only  too  liable  to  succumb  ;  they  tend  to  make  him 
more  of  a  worldling,  less  of  a  Christian.  Such  views 
belong  to  the  so-called  Ebionitism  of  St.  James.  But 
the  opinions  of  the  Ebionites  were  due  to  the  falsehood 

Christian  parading  his  ring  of  the  Jewish  Covenant  (I),  while  the  poor 
man,  with  a  vih>  garmeut,  describes  the  Gentile  Christian  "  (Introd.  p.  27). 
This  is  to  introduce  into  New  Testament  exegesis  fancies  borrowed  from 
Lessing  and  Swift. 

1  This  would  resemble  Phil.  iii.  It),  "  whose  glory  is  in  their  shame." 
Compare  the  saying  of  Pascal  about  man — "  Gloire  et  rebut  de  rUnivers, 
s'il  se  vante,  je  I'abaisse ;  s'il  s'abaisse,  je  le  vante." 

-  Matt.  V.  3. 


RICH    AND    POOR.  45 

of  extremes.  Neither  is  wealth  in  itself  a  sin,  nor\y 
poverty  in  itself  a  virtue.  They  are  conditions  of  life 
in  which  God  has  placed  us,  each  liable  to  its  own,  and 
each  to  different  temptations.  But  as  regards  those 
days — perhaps  as  regards  all  periods — riches  were  liable 
to  severer  temptations  than  poverty.  In  the  teaching 
of  St.  James  we  recognise,  not  the  exaggerations  of 
Ebionitism,  but  the  impression  left  by  the  sermons 
and  parables  of  Christ  ^  (i.  10). 

vi.  And  the  reason  why  the  rich  brother  should  glory 
in  the  humiliation  which  the  world  regards  as  his 
enviable  superiority  is  that  reason  which  Isaiah  had  so 
exquisitely  expressed,  and  to  which  St.  Peter  also  refers.^ 
It  is  the  transitoriness  of  riches.^  Often,  even  in 
this  brief  life,  they  make  themselves  wings  and  fly 
away.  But  they  must  always  pass  away  with  the  fading 
flower  of  life ;  not  even  the  poorest  fragment  of  them 
can  be  held  by  the  relaxing  hand  of  death.  Is  that  a 
condition  to  glory  in,  which  Christ  showed  to  be  sur- 
rounded with  peril,  and  which  must  soon  become  like 
a  withered  blossom  in  a  dead  man's  hand  ?  (i.  11). 

vii.  But  whether  our  trial  comes  in  the  form  of 
wealth  or  of  poverty  it  becomes  a  beatitude  if  it  works 
in  us  the  spirit  of  patient  endurance.  And  here  it  is 
necessary  for  St.  James  to  introduce  a  strong  caution. 

^  Matt,  xxiii.  12  ;  Luke  xiv.  11 ;  xviii.  14.  The  commoner  view  of  the 
clause  is  "  Let  the  rich  man  rejoice  when  he  is  humiliated  by  the  "spoiling 
of  his  goods  "  (Heb.  x.  34).  But  (1)  this  loss  of  wealth  happens  only  to  a 
few.  (2)  He  is  throughout  addressing  "  rich  men,"  who  are  in  the  full 
flower  of  their  prosperity. 

2  Is.  xl.  6 ;  1  Pet.  i.  24  (comp.  Matt.  vi.  30 ;  xiii.  26). 

^  Some  refer  the  passage  chiefly  to  reverses  in  life.  "  The  rich  man, 
overtaken  by  judgment,  perishes  in  the  midst  of  his  doings  and  pursuits,  as 
the  flower,  in  the  midst  of  its  blessings,  falls  a  victim  to  the  scorching  lieat 
of  the  sun  "  (Hiither). 


46  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

The  word  which  he  has  used  for  temptation  is  capable 
of  two  meanings — trial  in  the  sense  of  a  difficult  and 
painful  test  {adversa  pati) ;  and  trial  in  the  sense  of 
strong  impulse  to  sin  {mails  ad  defectionem  soUicitari). 
In  the  first  sense  it  comes  from  God  ;  it  is  a  part  of 
His  providential  ordering  of  our  lives.  In  the  second 
sense  it  by  no  means  comes  from  Grod.^  When  a  man 
pleads,  as  men  have  so  often  done,  that  "  God  has  made 
them  so  ;"^  or  that  "  the  flesh  is  weak,"  or  that  "  God 
for  a  moment  deserted  them  ;"  ^  when  they  say  that 
they  have  done  wrong  because  they  could  not  do  other- 
wise ;^  when  they  contend  that  each  man  is  practically 
no  better  than  an  automaton,  and  that  his  actions  are 
the  inevitable — and  therefore  irresponsible — result  of  the 
conditions  by  which  he  is  surroun^k4 — they  are  trans- 
ferring to  God  the  blame  of  their  misdoings.  "  The 
foolishness  of  man  perverteth  his  way,  and  his  heart 

^  The  history  of  temptation,  says  Bede,  is  (1)  Snggestion;  (2)  Delight; 
(3)  Consent.  Suggestion  is  of  the  enemy,  delight  and  consent  from  our 
own  frailty.  If  the  birth  of  a  wrong  action  follows  the  delight  of  the 
heart,  the  enemy  leaves  us  as  a  victor,  and  we  are  liable  to  death."  "  Lust 
is  the  mother  of  sin,  sin  the  mother  of  death,  the  sinner  the  parent  of  both  " 
(Macknight). 

^  St.  Paul  deals  with  this  question — "  Why  doth  He  yet  find  fault  ? 
For  who  hath  resisted  His  will  ?  "  (Rom.  ix.  19.) 

^  "  Seems  there  any  recess  ?  It  is  we  forsake  Him ;  not  He  us  (Jer. 
ii.  17)  "  (Bishop  Andrewes). 

*  The  unhappy  Henry  II.,  shortly  before  his  death,  passionately 
exclaimed  to  God,  "  Since  Thou  hast  taken  from  mo  the  town  I  loved  best 
...  I  will  have  my  revenge  on  Thee  too.  I  will  rob  Thee  of  that  thing 
Thou  lovcst  most  in  me  "  (see  Green's  Hist,  of  Engl.  I.  p.  181).  There 
can  bo  little  doubt  that  St.  James  had  in  his  mind  a  magnificent  passage 
of  Ecclus.  XV.  11 — 17,  "  Say  not  thou,  '  It  is  through  the  Lord  that  I  fell 
away  : '  for  thou  oughtest  not  to  do  the  things  that  Ho  hateth.  Say  not  thou 
'  He  liath  caused  me  to  err,'  for  He  hath  no  need  of  the  sinful  man.  .  .  .  He 
hath  set  fire  and  water  before  thee :  stretch  forth  tliy  hand  unto  whether 
thou  wilt.  Before  man  i.i  life  and  death,  and  whether  him  liketh,  shall  be 
given  him." 


SIN    AND    DEATH.  47 

fretteth  against  the  Lord."^  The  doctrine  of  fatalism 
is  but  a  poor  and  false  excuse  for  crime. ^  When  pas- 
sively accepted  it  paralyses  every  nerve  of  moral  effort ; 
when  it  takes  the  form  of  materialism,  and  poses  as 
the  final  result  of  science,  it  lays  the  axe  at  the  root 
of  every  motive  by  which  men  rise  to  the  dignity  of 
free  and  moral  beings.  Men  become  the  children  of 
God  by  obedience  to  His  laws,  resulting  not  from 
necessity,  but  choice.  And  so  St.  James  gives  the  true 
genesis  of  sin.  It  springs  from  lust — desire — the  2/etser- 
ha-rd,  or  evil  impulse,  which  plays  so  large  a  part  in 
later  Jewish  literature.  This  is  to  each  soul  the  harlot- 
temptress  which  draws  him  forth  from  the  safe  shelter 
of  innocence,  entices  him,  and  bears  the  evil  offspring 
of  committed  sin.  But  the  bad  genealogy  ends  not 
there.  Sin,  too,  grows  to  maturity,  and  the  offspring  of 
her  incestuous  union  is  death  (i.  12 — 15). 

viii.  No,  God  is  not  the  author  of  evil ;  it  is  only 
every  good  gift  which  comes  from  Him.  "  God  is 
always  in  the  meridian."^  He  dwells  in  the  </)cb9  avk- 
crirepov,  in  the  light  whereof  there  is  no  eventide,  the  sun 
whereof  knows  no  tropic.  No  darkness  can  flow  from 
the  fountain  of  that  unchanging  Sun,  which  is  not 
liable  to  the  parallax  and  eclipses  of  the  heavenly 
bodies  which  He  has  made.*  And  then,  in  one  singu- 
larly pregnant  clause  which — although  in  this  respect 

'  Prov.  xix.  3. 

2  It  was  familiar  to  St.  James,  for,  as  Josephus  says,  it  was  a  doctrine 
of  the  Pharisees  {Antt.  xviii.  1,  §  3;  B.J.  ii.  8,  §  14).  ^  Wetstein. 

*  "  Though  the  lights  of  heaven  have  their  parallaxes,  yea  '  the  angels 
of  heaven  He  found  not  steadfastness  in  them  '  (Job  iv.  18) ;  yet  for  God, 
He  is  subject  to  none  of  them.  He  is  '  Ego  sum  qui  sum  '  (Ex.  iii.  14), 
that  is,  saith  Malachi,  '  Ego  Deus  et  non  mutor  (Mai.  iii.  6).  We  are  not 
what  we  were  awhUe  since,  what  we  shall  be  awhile  after,  scarce  what  we 
are ;  for  every  moment  makes  us  vary.     With  God  it  is  nothing  so.    He 


48  THE    EARLY  DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

it  stands  somewhat  isolated — shows  how  little  the 
practical  tendency  of  the  author  was  dissevered  from 
deep  dogmatic  insight,  he  tells  us  of  God's  most  perfect 
gift  to  us.  He  tells  us  that  we  need  a  new  life ;  that 
God  by  one  great  act  has  bestowed  it  upon  us  ;  that 
this  act  sprang  from  His  own  free  will  and  choice  ;^ 
that  the  instrument  of  this  new  birth  was  the  word 
of  truth,^  the  Divine  revelation  of  God  to  man,  which, 
of  course,  requires  faith  in  them  that  hear  it ;  that  the 
result  of  this  new  birth  is  our  dedication  as  "  the  first 
fruits  of  a  sacrificial  gift"^  which  shall  only  be  comple- 
ted with  the  offering  up  of  all  God's  creatures.  Thus 
in  one  brief  sentence  he  concentrates  many  solemn 
truths,  and  even  by  the  one  word,  "  of  His  own  will " 
i/Sovkrjdeh),  he  repudiates  alike  the  dangerous  fatalism 
of   the   Pharisees,   and   the  arrogant    assertion  of   the 

is  that  He  is;  He  is  and  cliangeth  not"  (Bishop  Andrcwes,  Serm.  iii.  374; 
John  viii.  58). 

^  God  is  the  cause  of  His  own  mercy.  "  Uude  seqiiitur  natiirale 
esse  Deo  benefacerc  "  (Calvin).  See  John  i.  13 ;  1  Pet.  i.  23.  fiov\tjdf\s, 
"  voluntate  amantissima,  liberrima,,  purissima.  foccundissima "  (1  John  i. 
13;  1  Pet.  i.  3).  'AireKiria-fv,  the  antithesis  to  the  airoKvei  of  sin,  in  ver.  17, 
"  Ipse  Dens  Patris  et  matris  loco  est "  (Bengel)  (Rom.  viii.  15 ;  Gal.  iii. 
26  ;  1  Pet.  i.  23). 

2  John  xvii.  17,  "  Sanctify  them  by  Thy  trutli.  Thy  word  is  Truth." 
1  Pet.  i.  23,  "  Having  boon  born  again  by  the  word  of  the  Living  God." 
It  is  the  equivalent  to  the  Gospel  (2  Tim.  ii.  15  ;  Eph.  i.  13).  "  The  lying 
word  of  the  serpent  has  corrupted  us,  but  the  true  word  of  God  makes  us 
good  again  "  (Luther).  Here  and  elsewhere,  some  {e.g.  Athanasius)  give 
to  "  the  Word  "  its  specific  Johanniiie  sense,  and  inti'ri)rct  it  of  Christ,  the 
Divine  Logos.  No  doubt  it  may  be  made  to  bear  this  meaning  in  this  and 
many  other  passages ;  but  as  this  letter  was  addressed  to  the  Jews  of  the 
Dispersion,  of  whom  many  had  no  Alexandrian  training  or  Alexandrian 
.sympathies,  the  question  is,  (1)  Would  they  so  have  understood  it  ?  and, 
therefore,  (2)  Did  St.  James  intend  it  so  to  be  understood  ? 

3  "  First-fruit  "  (see  Lev.  xxiii.  10  ;  Deut.  xxvi.  2 ;  1  Cor.  xv.  22 ;  xvi. 
15;  Rev.  xiv.  4).  Christ  is  the  true  first-fruit,  and  then  we  in  Him  (Rom. 
viii.  19 — 22).  See  a  valuable  note  of  Wiesingcr,  who  was  the  first  to  call 
due  attention  to  the  depth  and  importance  of  tliis  verse. 


PURE    SERVICE.  49 

Sadducees  that  salvation,  lies  within  the  power  of  our 
own  unaided  will  (i.  16 — 18). 

ix.  They  know  this  ;  but  let  them  apply  it — let  them 
listen  to  this  word  of  truth,  hearing  more,  speaking 
less,  wrangling  not  at  all.  Passionate  fanaticism  does 
not  help  forward  Grod's  righteousness.  It  deceives 
itself  when  it  brings  into  Grod's  service  that  impure 
mixture  of  human  evil.^  The  Gospel  is  meant  to  be 
used  for  our  own  sanctification,  not  to  be  abused  to 
quarrelsomeness  with  others.  God's  word,  implanted 
in  the  heart,^  is  powerful  to  save,  but  the  condition  of 
its  power  is  its  meek  reception.  It  requires  steady, 
earnest  contemplation,  not  a  mere  hasty  passing  gaze. 
There  were  many,  both  Jews  and  Christians,  who  were 
absorbed  in  outward  service^ — who  were  content  with 
endless  ablutions  and  purifications,  and  not  with  what 
is  true,  pure,  unspotted,  and  undefiled ;  who  made  long 
prayers,  and  yet  devoured  widows'  houses.  But  all 
service  is  fruitless  if  it  does  not  lead  a  man  to  refrain 
from  bitter  words.  The  only  pure  and  perfect  ritual  is 
active  love,*  and  a  freedom  from  "  the  contagions  of  the 
world's  slow  stain. "^ 


^  "  Purius  sine  ira  fit "  (Bengel).  There  is  always  a  germ  of  the 
atheistical  in  the  heat  of  fanaticism  (Nitsch),  as  in  Jonah's,  "  I  do  well  to 
be  angry."  Lange  observes  that  Simeon  and  Levi,  the  ancestors  of  the 
Jews  in  fanaticism,  were  disapproved  by  Jacob  (Gen.  xxxiv.  49),  but  after- 
wards upheld  as  patterns  (Judith  ix.  20). 

^  Perhaps  an  allusion  to  the  Parable  of  the  Sower,  and  so  parallel  with 
Matt.  xiii.  23.  The  word  fiJ.<pvTos  only  occurs  in  Wisd.  xii.  10.  In  classic 
Greek  it  means  also  "  innate,"  but  this  does  not  furnish  so  simple  a 
meaning,  though  it  may  be  compared  with  such  passages  as  Col.  ii.  16,  "  as 
ye  have  received  Christ,  so  walk  ye  in  Him." 

^  See  Dr.  Mozley's  admirable  sermon  on  the  Pharisees.  "  Qui  crassiora 
vitia  exuerunt,  huic  morbo  sunt  ut  plurimum  obnoxii "  (Calvin). 

*  Comp.  Tobit  i.  16,  17. 

'  "  The  outward  service  {Opna-Kfia)  of  ancient  religion,  the  rites,  cere- 

e 


50  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

He  proceeds,  in  the  second  chapter,  to  rebuke  the 
respect  of  persons,^  the  worldly  partialities,  which  are 
so  alien  to  "the  faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Lord  of  the  glor3^"^  That  faith  teaches  before  all 
things  the  Fatherhood  of  God  and  the  brotherhood  of 
man.  Since  in  God's  sight  all  are  equal — since  in  the 
eye  of  His  Church  the  greatest  princess  is  but  "  this 
woman,"  and  the  proudest  emperor  but  "this  man" — 
was  it  not  most  unworthy  to  thrust  oppressive  dispari- 
ties into  prominence  in  a  wrong  place  by  ushering  the 
gold-ringed  man^  in  the  bright  dress  into  the  best  seat 
in  the  synagogue,*  while  they  made  the  squalidly 
dressed  pauper''  stand  anywhere,  or  thrust  him  down 
into  a  seat  on  the  floor.     When  ye  acted  thus,  "  did  ye 

monies,  and  ceremonial  vestments  of  the  old  law,  liad  morality  for  their 
substance.  They  were  the  letter  of  which  morality  was  the  spirit;  the 
enigma  of  which  morality  was  the  meaning.  But  morality  itself  is  the 
service  and  ceremonial  {cultus  exterior,  ep-na-Kela)  of  the  Christian  religion  " 
(Coleridge.  Aids  to  Reflection,  Aph.  xxiii). 

'  Curiously  enough  the  Talmud  says,  "  God  is  a  respecter  of  persons,"' 
Num.  vi.  26  (Berachoth,  f.  20,  h). 

2  Lit.  "  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  of  the  glory."  Bengel  takes  the  two 
words  in  apposition — "  ut  ipse  Christus  dicatur,  fi  S<i^a,  Gloria."  The 
Sliechinah  was  a  Jewish  name  for  the  Messiah,  but  it  is  better,  as  in  the 
E.  v.,  to  understand  it  as  "the  Lord  of  the  glory"  (couip.  John  xvii.  5). 
The  title  hero  implies  the  utter  obliteration,  by  comparison,  of  petty 
earthly  distinctions. 

3  The  ostentation  of  gold  rings  was  a  fashion  of  this  epoch,  and  Roman 
fops  wore  them  even  inconveniently  large  (Juv.  Sat.  i.  28,  30 ;  Mart.  xi.  60), 
six  on  each  finger.  Lncian  {Somn.  12)  speaks  of  wearing  sixteen  heavy 
rings.     "  All  fingers  are  loaded  with  rings  "  (Plin.  H.  N.  xxxiii.  6). 

*  "  A  synagogue "  is,  on  the  whole,  the  best  supported  reading 
(m,  B,  C).  The  passage  is  not  a  mere  rebuke  to  "sexton  rudeness."  It 
illustrates  faitliloss  partiality  by  a  common  instance,  and  this  desire  for 
prominence  was  largely  developed  among  the  Jews  (Matt,  xxiii.  6).  Chris- 
tians probably  used  Jewish  synagogues  (as  St.  Paul  did)  as  long  as  they 
were  permitted  to  do  so. 

*  No  doubt  "  gold  rings  "  and  squalid  apparel  (Zoch.  iii.  3,  4 ;  Rev.  xxii. 
11 )  may  be  used  symbolically,  but  to  understand  this  passage  as  an  allegory 


RESPECT  OF  PERSONS.  51 

not  douht  in  yourselves,^  and  did  ye  not  show  wicked 
reasonings  as  judges  ? "  It  shows  doubt  to  act  as 
though  Christ  had  never  promised  His  kingdom  to  the 
poor,  rich  in  faith  -^  and  wicked  reasonings  to  argue 
mentally  that  the  poor  must  he  less  worthy  of  honour 
than  the  rich.  It  is  the  evil  schism  in  the  heart 
which  leads  to  this  evil  judgment  in  the  life.  And  was 
not  this  a  strange  method  of  judging,  when  it  was  the 
rich  who  played  the  lord  over  them,  dragged  them  into 
law-courts,^  and  blasphemed  the  fair  name  by  which 
they  were  named  ?^  It  were  nobler  to  fulfil  the  royal 
law,^  "  Love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself,"  and  so  to  treat 
all,  whether  rich  or  poor,  with  equal  courtesy.  Not  to 
act  thus  is  sin.  They  must  not  regard  such  sin  as 
unimportant.     There  is  in   God's  law  a  uniform   soli- 

of  Jewish  exclusiveness  towards  the  Gentiles  (as  Lange  does),  is  very  far. 
fetched.     Notice  the  picturesque  antitheses — 

Yon — sit — here — honourably  (near  the  coffer  which  held  the  Law). 

You — stand, — there — under  my  footstool  (out  of  sight  and  hearing,  near 
the  door). 

Even  in  courts  of  law  the  Jewish  rule  was  that  (to  show  the  perfect 
impartiality  of  the  law)  hoth  suitors,  whether  rich  or  poor,  should  sit,  or 
hoth,  stand. 

'  StfKplOriTf.  "  Doubt "  is  the  ordinary  meaning  of  SiaKpivofim,  as  in  i.  6  ; 
and  there  is  no  reason  to  change  it  here  into  "  make  differences,  or  judge," 
etc.  (Matt.  xxi.  21 ;  Acts  x.  20;  Rom.  iv.  20,  etc.). 

2  Matt.  V.  3 ;  Luke  vi.  20. 

3  Acts  vii.  12  ;  xvii.  12 ;  xviii.  5  ;  xix.  38. 

*  Literally  "  which  was  invoked  over  you  "  (Deut.  xxviii.  10,  etc. ;  Jcr. 
xiv.  9 ;  Am.  ix.  12  ;  Heb.  xi.  16),  i.e.,  the  name  of  Christ.  Christians  were 
called  o(  Xpta-Tou  (1  Cor.  iii.  23).  Nominal  Christians,  however  rich,  could 
hardly  have  ventured  to  "  blaspheme,"  or  "  speak  injuriously  of,"  the  name 
of  Christ.  St.  James  must  be  passing  in  thought  to  rich  Jews,  Sadducean 
oppressors,  etc.  (Acts  iv.  1,  6,  v.  17),  though  he  may  include  the  conduct 
of  rich  Christians  which  caused  Christ's  name  to  be  blasphemed  among  the 
Gentiles,  as  the  Jews  caused  God's  name  to  be  (Rom.  ii.  24;  comp.  2  Sam. 
xii.  14). 

^  A  royal  law,  because  the  best  of  all  laws — a  king  of  laws.  "  Love  is 
the  fulfilment  (irA^pw^a)  of  the  Law  "  (Rom.  xiii.  10). 

e  2 


52  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIAXITY. 

darity,  and  one  God  made  all  the  law.  To  break  one 
commandment  is  to  break  all/  for  it  is  to  violate  the 
principle  of  obedience,  just  as  "it  matters  not  at  what 
particular  point  a  man  breaks  his  way  out  of  an  en- 
closure, if  he  is  forbidden  to  go  out  of  it  at  all."^  Every 
separate  commandment  has  the  same  Divine  source.  The 
sum  total  of  all  commandments  is  that  law  of  liberty' 
by  which  we  shall  be  judg-ed.  That  judgment  shall  be 
merciless  to  the  merciless.*  And  then  he  adds,  with 
an  emphasis  all  the  more  forcible  from  its  brevity  and 
abruptness  :  "  Mercy  " — whether  in  the  heart  of  God  or 
of  man — "  glories  over  judgment  "''     (ii.  1 — 13). 

The    passage   that   follows    is    the   famous   passage 
about  justification  by  works  : — 

"What  is  the  advantage,  my  brethren,  if  any  say  that  he  has 
faith,  but  hath  not  works'?^  Is  the  faith  able  to  save  him  ?'^  But 
if  a  brother  or  a  sister  be  naked,  and  lacking  the  day's  food,  and  one 

^  "  He  who  observes  but  one  precept,  secures  for  liiniself  an  advocate 
(Parklit,  or  Paraclete),  aud  lie  who  commits  one  siu  procures  for  himself  an 
accuser  "  (Pirke  Avoth,  iv.  15). 

^  "  A  garment  is  torn  thougli  you  ouly  take  away  one  piece  of  it ;  a 
harmony  iu  music  is  spoiled  if  ouly  oue  voice  be  out  of  tune  "  (Starke). 

'  St.  James  is  thiuking  of  the  free  service  of  the  will  to  Christ's  pure 
moral  law,  not  of  the  law  "  which  genderotli  to  bondage,"  and  enforces 
incessant  restrictions  on  unwilling  souls  (Gal.  iv.  10,  24),  which  was  a  yoko 
which  neither  they  nor  their  fathers  had  been  able  to  bear  (Acts  xv.  10). 

*  Matt.  vii.  1. 

*  This  is  a  groat  law  of  the  moral  kingdom.  It  applies  alike  to  God  and 
to  men.  'Tis  miglitiest  in  the  miglitiest.  It  is  the  reason  why  Christian 
universality  is  better  than  Judaising  exchisivonoss ;  wliy  the  geniality, 
love,  and  briglitnoss  of  tlie  Gospel  is  bettor  than  the  gloomy  hatred  of  the 
Talmud  ;  wliy  tolerance  is  better  than  the  Inquisition ;  why  philanthropy 
is  nobler  than  sensual  egotism  (see  Lange,  p.  78). 

®  Com]).  01)  yap  6(pti\Ti<T(i  Tiva  rh  Kfynv  oAAck  t^  ■kohIv'  iK  Travrhs  oZv 
rpSirov   Ka\oi>y  (pyivy  xp*'«  (Clom.  Horn.  viii.  7). 

^  Not  if  it  be  the  faith  tliat  St.  James  has  in  view,  wliioh  is  here  merely 
a  theoretically  orthodox  belief,  not  a  vital  faith.  Such  a  faith  cannot  save 
sucli  a  man.     Vital  faith  carries  in  itself  the  animating  principle  from 


FAITH    AND    WORKS.  53 

of  you.  should  say,  '  Go  in  peace  ;'  warm  yourselves  and  feed  your- 
selves,' but  ye  give  them  not  the  necessaries  of  the  body,  what  is  the 
advantage  12  So  also  faitli,  if  it  have  not  works,  is  dead  in  itself.^ 
Yea,  some  one  may  say  *  [quite  fairly],  '  Thou  hast  faith  and  I  have 
works.  Show  me  thy  faith  without  the  works '  — which  you  cannot 
flo — '  and  I,'  who  do  not  pretend  to  believe  in  the  possibility  of  such  a 
faith,  'will,' very  easily,  'show  thee  my  faith  by  my  works  '  "  (ii.  14-18). 

Assuming  that  the  Solifidian — the  believer^  in  the 
possibility  of  an  abstract  faith  which  can  show  no  works 
as  an  evidence  of  its  existence — is  thus  refuted,  St.  James 
proceeds  to  refute  him  still  farther : — "  T/iou  belie  vest 
that  Grod  is  one."^     It  was  the  proud  boast  of  the  Jew, 

which  works  must  emanate.  The  whole  argument  is  aimed  at  those  Anti- 
nomians  who  said,  "  If  you  have  faith,  it  matters  little  how  you  live  " 
(Jer.  in  Mich.  iii.  5). 

^  Such  a  jjarting  benediction  would,  without  some  accompanying  help, 
be  as  incongruous  a  mockery  as  Claudius's  reply  of  "  Avete  vos"  to  the 
gladiators'  "  Morituri  te  salutamus  "  ( Judg.  xviii.  6  ;  2  Kings  xv.  9 ;  Lk. 
vii.  50 ;  viii.  48).  Similarly,  Plautus  has  "  Of  what  use  is  your  benevolent 
language  if  your  help  is  dead  ?  "  {Epidic.  i.  2,  13). 

^  St.  James  uses  an  illustration  of  what  faith  leads  to,  which  he  borrows 
from  the  teaching  of  Christ  (Matt.  xxv.  35 — 46). 

^  Just  as  the  compassion  is  dead  and  useless  if  it  be  that  of — 

"  The  sluggard  Pity's  vision-weaving  tribe, 
Who  sigh  for  wretchedness  yet  shun  the  wretched, 
Nursing  in  some  delicious  solitude 
Their  dainty  loves  and  slothful  sympathies" — (Coleridge.) 

8o  faith  is  dead  and  useless  if  it  do  not  work  by  love.  "  No  spirit,  if  no 
work  {Spectrum  est,  non  spiritus) ;  a  flying  shadow  it  is ;  a  spirit  it  is  not, 
if  work  it  do  not.  Having  wherewith  to  do  good,  if  you  do  it  not,  talk  not 
of  faith,  for  you  have  no  faith  in  you  if  you  have  wherewith  to  show  it 
and  show  it  not "  (Bp.  Andrewes). 

*  'AAA'  epe?  tis,  is  something  in  St.  Paul's  manner  (1  Cor.  xv.  35 ;  Rom, 
ix.  19).  The  interlocutor  is  not  here,  however,  an  objector,  but  a  Gentile 
Christian,  who  makes  a  perfectly  true  criticism  of  tlie  worthlessness  of  an 
idle  orthodoxy  (see  Tert.  Be  Pcenit.  5).  "  Faith,"  says  Luther,  "  is  the 
mother  who  gives  birth  to  the  virtues  as  her  children."  And  St.  Paul 
presses  the  same  truth  quite  as  clearly  as  St.  James  (Rom.  ii.  13). 

*  2u,  emphatic;  thoii,  as  distinguished  from  the  heathen.  The  Jews 
had  learnt  Credere  Deum,  and  Credere  Deo,  but  not  (according   to   St. 


54  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

who,  among  all  tlie  nations  of  antiquity,  gloried  in 
being  a  monotheist. 

"  Excellent  so  far ;  the  demons  also  believe  and  shudder.*  But 
wilt  thou  recognise,  0  vain  luau,^  that  faith  apart  from  works  is 
idle?^  Abraham,  our  fatlier  —  was  he  not  justified  by  works, 
when  he  offered  up  Isaac  his  son  upon  the  altar]''  Dost  thou  see 
that  faith  wrought  with  his  works,^  and  by  works  the  faith  was 
perfected  1^  And  the  Scripture  was  fulfilled  which  says,^  '  But 
Abraham  believed  God,  and  it  was  reckoned  unto  him  for  righteous- 
ness, and  he  was  called  the  Friend  of  God.*     Ye  see  that  by  works  a 

Augustine's  distinction)  Credere  in  Deuni.  This  shows  that  St.  James  is 
thinking  of  somo  sort  of  verbal  orthodoxy,  not  of  specific  Christian  faith. 
The  Unity  of  God  was  the  very  first  and  most  important  belief  of  Judaism. 
The  first  line  of  the  Talmud  begins  with  discussing  it ;  it  was  daily  repeated 
in  the  Shemd  (Dcut.  vi.  4),  to  which,  as  to  all  their  observances,  the  Jews 
attached  most  extravagant  virtue.  Thus  they  said  that  the  fires  of  Grchenna 
would  be  cooled  for  liim  who  repeated  it  with  attention  to  its  very  letters. 
To  this  they  attached  Hab.  ii.  4.  All  the  fine  things  which  they  called 
hapardes  (D"nDn),  the  "  Garden,"  or  "  Paradise,"  turned  on  the  Unity  of 
God.  Akhiva  was  supremely  blessed  because  he  died  uttering  the  word 
"  One  "  {see  infra,  p.  83). 

'  This  unique  and  unexpected  word  {(pplffo-ovfft,  horrescunt)  comes  in 
with  gi*eat  rhetorical  and  ironic  force.  It  explains  the  horror  of  physical 
autipatliy.  For  the  fact,  see  Matt.  viii.  29 ;  Mark  ix.  20,  26.  "  The 
sarcasm  lies  in  the  fact  itself.  Formally,  it  only  flashes  out  in  the  splendid 
Ka( "  (Lauge). 

*  The  Hebrew  Mr;i ,  Raca  (Matt.  v.  22).  Some  think  that  this  objur- 
gation is  aimed  at  St.  Paul !  Apostles  did  not  speak  of  each  other  in  the 
language  of  modern  religious  controversy  (see  Pirke  Avoth,  i.  17). 

•^   apyi^,   B,  C. 

*  St.  Paul  does  not  refer  to  this  act,  which  is  indeed  only  alluded  to 
in  Heb.  xi.  17  (and  Wisd.  x.  5),  but  to  the  faith  which  Abraham  had  shown 
forty  years  before.  ^  "  Operosa  fuit  non  otiosa  "  (Calvin). 

^  "  Faith  aided  in  the  completion  of  the  work,  and  the  work  aided  in  the 
completion  of  the  faith  "  (Lange).  "  His  faith  was  completed,  not  that  it 
had  Ijoen  imperfect,  but  that  it  was  consummated  in  the  exercise  "  (Luther). 

^  Says  ehcwhcre.  Gen.  xv.  G  (before  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac). 

'  Is.  xli.  8.  In  Gen.  xxv.  9,  this  clause  seoms  to  have  occurred  in  some 
rMwiings  (Ewald,  Vie  Scndschreiben,  ii.  225).  Abraham  is  still  known 
through  the  East  as  El  Khalil  Allah  ("the  Friend  of  God  "),  and  heuco 
Hebron  is  called  El  Klialil.  Dean  Plumptre  points  out  the  curious  fact 
tliat  the  title  occurs  neither  in  the  Hebrew  nor  in  the  LXX.,  and  is 
first  applied  to  Abraham  by  Philo  (De  resip.  Noe,  c.  11). 


ORACULAR    EGOTISM.  55 

man  is  justified,  and  not  by  faith  only.^  But  likewise  also  Rahab, 
the  harlot,^  was  she  not  justified  by  works,  when  she  received  the 
messengers,  and  hastily  sent  them  forth  by  another  way  1  For  even 
as  the  body  apart  from  the  spirit  is  dead,  so  also  faith  apart  from 
works  is  dead,"^ 

Leaving  the  theology  of  this  remarkable  passage 
for  subsequent  discussion,*  in  order  not  to  break 
the  thread  of  the  Epistle,  we  proceed  to  the  next 
chapter. 

It  was  natural  that  those  who  had  seized  a  Shib- 
boleth, of  which  they  neither  fathomed  the  full  depth 
nor  even  rightly  understood  the  superficial  meaning, 
should  endeavour  to  enforce  it  upon  others  with  irate, 
obtrusive,  and  vehement  dogmatism.  This  "  itch  of 
teaching,"  this  oracular  egotism,  is  the  natural  result 
of  vanity  and  selfishness  disguising  themselves  under 
the  cloak  of  Gospel  proselytism.  With  all  such  men 
words  take  the  place  of  works,  and  dogmatising  con- 
tentiousness of  peace  and  love.  Therefore  he  warns 
them  against  being  many  teachers'^ — self-constituted 
ministers — "  other  peoples'  bishops"^ — persons  of  that 
large   class    who  assume   that  no  incompetence  is  too 

^  St.  Paul  had  adduced  Abraham  as  a  proof  of  justification  hj  faith, 
not  by  legalism.  St.  James  adduces  him  as  an  example  of  justification  by 
the  works  which  spring  from  faith,  not  by  orthodoxy. 

2  This  second  example  is  chosen  because  he  wishes  to  prove  the  unity 
of  faith  in  Jews  and  Gentiles,  by  two  examples  of  faith  manifested  by  works. 
Abraham  was  a  man,  a  Hebrew,  a  Prophet ;  Rahab  a  woman,  a  Canaanite. 
a  harlot;  yet  both  were  justified  {i.e.,  shown  to  be  righteous  in  the  moral 
sense)  by  works  which  sprang  from  their  faith  (Heb.  xi.  31). 

3  ii.  19-26. 

♦  See  infra,  pp.  79—100. 

*  Any  authorised  person  might  speak,  either  in  the  synagogue  or  the 
early  Christian  assembly  (1  Cor.  xiv.  26—34).  The  ordinary  readers  and 
preachers  were  not  clergy  at  all.  The  eager  seizure  of  a  party  watchword 
would  be  likely  to  lead  to  mere  prating. 

^   aWorpioeirlffKOiroi    (1  Pet.  iv.  15). 


66  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

absolute  to  rob  them  of  the  privilege  of  infallibility  in 
laying  down  the  law  of  truth  for  others.  "  My  brethren, 
do  not  become  many  teachers,^  being  well  aware  that 
we  (teachers)  shall  receive  a  severer  judgment  than 
others,"  since  our  responsibility  is  greater  than  theirs. 
"For  in  many  respects  we  stumble,  all  of  us."^ 
Speech  is  the  instrument  of  all  teachers.  If  any  man 
stumbles  not  in  word,  he  is  a  perfect  man,^  able  to 
bridle  also  the  whole  body.  Sins  of  speech  are  so 
common,  the  temptations  to  them  are  so  universal, 
that  there  can  be  no  question  of  the  perfect  wisdom  and 
self-control  of  him  who  has  acquired  an  absolute  im- 
munity from  these.  For  how  great  is  the  power  of  the 
tongue  !  how  evil  its  depravity,  untameableness,  and 
duplicity !  It  is  like  the  little  bridles  which  rule 
the  horse,  like  the  little  helms  that  steer  the  great 
ships.     It  is  like  the  spark  which  kindles  a  conflagra- 

•  Matt,  xxiii.  8 — 10.  "  But  be  uot  ye  called  Rabbi,  for  one  is  your 
guide — even  Christ ;  but  aU  ye  are  brethren."  "  Love  the  work,  but  strive 
not  after  the  honour  of  a  teacher  "  (Pirke  Avoth,  i.  10). 

^  St.  James  would  no  more  have  thought  of  claiming  immunity  from 
sin  than  St.  Paul  (Phil.  iii.  12)  or  St.  John  (1  John  i.  8)  did.  When 
Schleiermacher  condemned  this  passage  as  "  bombast,"  he  condemned  the 
equally  strong  language  of  many  great  moralists  of  aU  ages.  And  it  must 
be  remembered  that  St.  James  was  living  in  the  Jerusalem  of  a.d.  60. 
There  was  not  more  backbiting  then  than  there  now  is,  but  good  men 
felt  its  evil  more  strongly.  They  did  not  take  an  interest  in  it,  let  it 
lie  on  their  tables,  subscribe  to  its  dissemination.  Compare  the  Ian- 
guage  of  the  Son  of  Sirach  (xxviii.  15 — 26) :  "  Many  have  fallen  by  the  edge 
of  the  sword,  but  not  so  many  as  have  fallen  by  the  tongue.  .  .  .  Strong 
cities  hath  it  pulled  down ;  well  is  he  that  hath  uot  passed  through  the 
venom  thereof.  .  .  The  death  thereof  is  an  evil  death ;  the  grave  were 
better  than  it.  .  .  .  Such  as  forsake  tlie  Lord  shall  fall  into  it ;  atid  it  shall 
hnrn  in  them  and  not  be  quenched  ;  it  shall  be  .sent  unto  tliein  as  a  lion, 
and  devour  them  as  a  leopard."  For  Jewish  views,  even  of  the  Talmudists, 
see  Schoettgen. 

3  "  By  thy  words  thou  shalt  be  justified  "  (Matt.  x.ii.  37).  See  the  great 
sermon  on  tliis  text  by  Barrow. 


THE    TONGUE.  57 

tion  in  the  forest.^  Yes,  the  tongue — that  world  of 
injustice — is  a  fire.  It  inflames  the  wheel  of  being,^ 
and  is  ever  inflamed  by  Gehenna.^  It  is  the  sole  un- 
tameable  creature — a  restless  mischief  brimmed  with 
deathful  venom.*  Therewith  we  bless  the  Lord  and 
Father,  and  therewith  we  curse  the  human  beings  who 
have  been  made  after  His  likeness.^  Is  this  inconsis- 
tency anything  short  of  monstrous  ?  '^  Is  it  not  like 
a  fountain  bubbling  out  of  the  same  fissure  the  bitter  as 
well  as  the  sweet  ?  Can  a  tree  produce  fruits  not  its 
own?^  Can  the  salt  water  of  a  cursing  tongue  produce 
the  sweet  water  of  praise?  (iii.  1 — 12). 

^  Both  these  metaphors  are  common  in  classical  writers  (Soph.  Antig. 
332,  475),  and  both  occur  in  the  hymn  of  Clemens  of  Alexandria  {Pcedog. 
ad  finem).  "  Quam  lenibus  initiis  quanta  incendia  oriuntur "  (Sen. 
Controv.  V.  5).  "TKrj  is  here  probably  "a  wood,"  not  "material."  The 
setting  on  fire  of  forests  by  sparks  furnished  similes  even  in  Homer's 
days  (Hom.  II.  ii.  455  ;  xi.  115  ;  Virg.  Georg.  ii.  303  :  "  et  totum  involvit 
flammis  nemus");  but  St.  James  is  more  likely  to  have  adopted  it  from 
Philo  (De  migr.  Ahr.  p.  407).     fxijaXavx^'i  (ver.  5)  occurs  only  in  Philo. 

2  iii.  6.,  Thv  rpoxhv  rris  yevfffeais  (comp.  Eccl.  xii.  6).  It  is  a  phi'ase  of 
uncertain  meaning,  perhaps  "  the  orb  of  creation " — hardly  "  the  rolling 
wheel  of  life  "  {a.vaKVK\7]<ns,  see  Windet,  De  Vita  fund.),  though  Aiiacreon 
uses  that  expression,  and  the  Syriac  here  has,  "  it  tumeth  the  course  of 
our  generations,  which  run  as  a  wheel "  (comp.  Sil.  Ital.  iii.  6,  "  rota 
volvitur  aevi)." 

^  Comp.  Pss.  Iii.  2 — 5 ;  cxx.  3,  4 ;  Prov.  xxvi.  27  :  "  there  is  as  a 
burning  fire ;  "  (Ecclus.  v.  14 ;  xxii.  24,  "  As  the  vapour  and  smoke  of  a 
furnace  goeth  before  the  fire,  so  reviling  before  blood  "). 

*  Hermas,  who  has  several  references  to  this  Epistle,  says  (Pastor. 
ii.  2) :  "  Backbiting  is  a  wicked  spirit,  and  a  restless  demon  "  (comj).  Ps. 
cxl.  13). 

^  Even  in  fallen  man,  "  remanet  nohilitas  indelebilis  "  (Beng.).  He  still 
retains  sparks  {scintillulae,  Confess.  Belg.  14)  of  the  heavenly  fire,  though 
"  very  far  gone  from  original  righteousness  "  (Art.  ix.). 

®  The  word  xph  occurs  here  alone  in  the  New  Testament  or  the  LXX. 
The  word  which  they  use  for  "ought"  is  Se?,  which  expresses  moral 
fitne.ss.     "  Praise  is  not  seemly  in  the  mouth  of  a  sinner  "  (Ecclus.  xv.  9). 

'^  Matt.  vii.  16,  17.  The  metaphor  both  of  this  and  the  next  verse 
show  a  marked  local  colouring. 


68  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

These  sins  of  the  tongue  among  Jews  and  Chris- 
tians sprang  in  great  measure  from  the  obtrusive 
rivalries,  the  contentious  ambitions  to  which  he  had 
alluded  in  the  first  verse.  Never  have  they  been 
extinct.  Party  spirit  has  always  been  a  curse  and 
disease  of  every  religion,  even  of  the  Christian.  The 
formulas  of  Christian  councils  have  been  tagged 
with  anathemas ;  Te  Deums  have  been  chanted  at 
Autos  da  Fe.  And  because  this  factiousness  shows 
an  absence  of  true  wisdom  amid  the  pride  of  its 
imagined  presence,  he  proceeds  to  contrast  the  false  and 
the  true  wisdom.  True  wisdom,  true  understanding,^ 
is  shown  by  a  course  of  life  spent  in  meekness,  which 
is  the  attribute  of  wisdom."  For  a  man  to  boast  of 
wisdom  when  his  heart  is  full  of  bitter  emulation  and 
party  spirit  is  a  lying  vaunt.  The  wisdom  of  which  he 
thus  boasts  is  not,  at  any  rate,  the  heavenly  wisdom 
of  the  Christian,  but  earthly,  animal,^  demon-like.  The 
wisdom  which  evinces  itself  in  party  spirit  leads  to 
"unhallowed  chaos  and  every  contemptible  practice. 
"  But  the  wisdom  from  above  is  first  pure,*  then  peace- 

^  "Who  is  wise  {chakam)  and  intelligent  {nabhon)  amongst  you?" 
(Deut.  i.  13;  iv.  6;  Eph.  i.  8;  Col.  i.  9).  The  firKrT-n/j.wi'  is  one  who 
understands  and  knows ;  the  ao(p6s  is  one  who  carries  out  his  knowledge 
into  his  life.  "  Knowledge  comes,  but  wisdom  lingers  "  (Tennyson).  (Job 
xxviii.  12.)  2  pg  1  16—20. 

•*  \pvxiiths  (see  Jude  19) ;  \f/vx'Ko\,  irvevfia  /Mr]  ex'"''''*^-  "  Soulish  " — i.e., 
sensuous — living  only  the  natural  animal  life,  and  therefore  unspiritual. 
This  wisdom  is  earthly,  because  it  avariciously  cares  for  tlio  goods  of  earth 
(Phil.  iii.  19) ;  animal,  because  it  is  under  the  sway  of  animal  lusts  (1  Cor. 
ii.  14) ;  demon-like,  bocause  full  of  pride,  egotism,  malignity,  and  ambition, 
which  are  works  of  the  devil  (1  Tim.  iv.  1). 

*  "  Pure,"  i.e.,  cliaste,  consecrated,  free  from  admixture  of  carnal 
motives.  Even  out  of  this  strong  condemnation  of  contentious  dogmatism, 
the  universal  misintt^rj)retation  of  Scripture  has  extorted  an  excuse — nay. 
an  argument — for  intolerance.  But  the  wisdom  is  only  said  to  be  "first 
pure,"  because    "  purity "    describes  its  inward   essence,   and  the   other 


HEAVENLY    WISDOM.  59 

ful,  reasonable,  open  to  persuasion,  full  of  mercy  and 
good  fruits,  without  vacillation,^  without  hj'-pocrisy.  .  .  . 
But  the  fruit  of  righteousness  is  ever  sown  in  peace  by 
those  who  work  peace  "  (ii.  13 — 18).  Thus  we  see 
that  with  St.  James,  no  less  than  with  St.  Paul,  St. 
Peter,  and  St.  John,  love,  peace,  mutual  respect,  mutual 
toleration,  is  the  highest  form  of  wisdom,  and  is  a 
far  truer  sign  than  a  contentious  and  bitter  orthodoxy 
that  he  who  has  it  has  reached  to  the  highest  ideal 
of  the  Christian  character. 

But  how  stronp-  are  the  feelins-s  of  St.  James  on  this 
subject !  It  was  a  period  of  turmoil  and  contention 
within  and  without  the  fold.^ 

"  Whence,"  he  asks,  "  come  wars,  and  whence  fightings  among 
you  1     Is  it  not  from  hence,   from  your  pleasures  that  militate  in 

epithets  its  outward  manifestations.  "  Peaceable  "  (Matt.  v.  9),  "  reason- 
able," i.e.,  "  forbearing "  (1  Tim.  iii.  3),  "  open  to  persuasion "  (Vulg. 
suadibilis),  or  perhaps  "  winning  its  way  by  gentleness."  Seven  qualities 
of  wisdom — seven  colours  of  the  Divine  rainbow — all  blended  into  the  one 
"  Light  of  the  world."  The  phrase  "  the  wisdom  from  above  "  is  common 
in  the  Talmudic  writings,  where  it  is  attributed  to  Adam,  Enoch, 
Solomon,  etc. 

^  aSiaKpiTos,  one  of  St.  James's  frequent  hapax  legomena.  It  is  better 
to  interpret  it  by  the  ordinary  sense  of  SiaKpii/oiJ.ai,  "  to  doubt."  The  E.  V. 
follows  Luther  in  rendering  it  "  without  partiality."  Bengel  says,  "  Non 
facit  discrimen  ubi  non  opus  est."  Lange,  "  unsectarian,"  "  not  Separatist," 
i.e.,  not  Pharisaic.  There  is  force  in  his  remark  that  the  epithet  would 
naturally  refer  to  social  conduct,  and  have  some  relation  to  avvir6Kpiros. 
If  so,  we  may  render  it  "  not  partial,"  or  "  censorious."  "  Being  a5i6.Kpnos 
it  does  not  spy  out  motes  in  a  brother's  eye ;  and  being  avuiriKpiTos,  it  does 
not  hide  the  beam  in  its  own  "  (Woi'dsvvorth,  who  adds  that  "  this  beautiful 
picture  of  true  wisdom  may  be  placed  side  by  side  with  that  of  charity 
portrayed  by  St.  Paul,  1  Cor.  xiii.).  Comp.  Ecclus.  i.  1 — 11,  "  All  wisdom 
Cometh  from  the  Lord,  and  is  with  Him  for  ever.  .  .  "Wisdom  liath  bceu 
created  before  all  things,  and  the  understanding  of  prudence  from  ever- 
lasting. The  Word  of  God  Most  Higli  is  the  fountain  of  wisdom.  .  .  She 
is  with  all  flesh,  according  to  His  gift,  and  He  hath  given  her  to  them 
that  love  Him." 

^  See  infra.  Chapter  xxix.,  on  the  Last  Days  of  Jerusalem, 


60  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

your  members?'  Ye  desire  and  Iiave  not.  Ye  murder^  and  envy 
and  are  not  able  to  obtain.  Ye  battle  and  ye  war,  and  ye  receive 
not  because  ye  ask  not  for  yourselves.  Ye  ask  and  receive  not 
because  ye  ask  ill  for  yourselves  that  ye  may  squander  it  in  your 
})leasures.  Adulteresses  ! '  know  ye  not  that  the  friendship  of  the 
world  is  enmity  against  God  1  Whosoever,  then,  prefers  to  be  a 
friend  of  the  world,  establishes  himself  as  an  enemy  of  God.  Or 
deem  ye  that  it  is  vainly  that  the  Scripture  saith,  *  The  spirit  which 
He  made  to  dwell  in  us  jealously  yearneth  over  us?'*  But"  (because 
of  this  jealous  love  for  us)  "  He  giveth  greater  grace.  Wherefore 
He  saith  God  arrayeth  Himself  against  the  haughty,  but  giveth 
grace  to  the  humble"  ^  (iv.  1 — 6). 

i.  This  passage  is  in  several  respects  remarkable. 
First,  we  cannot  but  feel  surprise  at  such  a  picture 
as  this.  Wars,  fightings,  pleasures  that  are  ever  setting 
out  as  it  were  on  hostile  expeditions,^  disappointed 
desires,  frustrate  envy  and  even  fruitless  murder  to 
supply  wants  which  would  have  been  granted  to  prayer 

'  "  For  in  truth  nothing  else  except  the  body  and  its  desires  causes 
wars,  and  seditions,  and  battles  "  (Plato,  Phcedo,  p.  66,  c). 

2  Some  conjecture  <pdoi>(7Tf,  "  ye  grudge ;  "  but  the  reading  is  probably 
right,  and  means  "  ye  murder,"  not  "  ye  wish  to  kill,"  etc.     See  below. 

^  Moixa\l5es !  (The  fioixoi  is  Omitted  by  m.  A,  B).  The  feminine  word 
is  explained  by  the  common  Old  Testament  metaphor  for  idolatry  (Isa.  liv. 
5 ;  Jer.  ii.  12 ;  Ezek.  xvi.  32).  Hence  in  the  New  Testament  ytvfa 
fiotxa\is  (Matt.  xii.  39;  x\n.  4;  2  Cor.  xi.  2);  and  the  strange  expression  of 
2  Pet.  ii.  14,  "  having  eyes  full  of  an  adulteress  "  (see  note  there). 

*  See  infra,  p.  63.  irphs  <pe6vov,  not  "  against  envy "  (Luther),  but 
the  phrase  seems  to  be  adverbial,  like  irphs  fiiav,  -nphs  tiSoyijv,  etc.  iiriiroet7 
never  means  "lusteth."  as  in  E.V.,  but  expresses  warm  tenderness  (2  Cor. 
ii.  9;  Phil.  i.  8).  This  seems  to  be  the  only  tenable  translation.  I 
may  mention  one  other  version,  which  is  to  make  -nvfvua  an  accusative — 
"  God  yearns  jealously  for  the  spirit  which  He  placed  in  us,  and  gives  us 
greater  grace."  Yet  another  way  (but  inconsistent  with  the  usage  of 
tlie  phrase  rj  ypa<pi)  Xtyd)  is  to  break  tlie  clause  into  two  questions — "  Do 
ye  fancy  tluit  tlu!  Scripture  speaketli  vainly  f  Doth  the  Spirit,  which  He 
planted  in  us,  lust  to  envy?"  (I  see  that  this  is  accepted  by  the  Revised 
Version,  with  the  other  renderings  in  tlie  margin.) 

^  Prov.  iii.  34 ;  1  Pet.  v.  5 ;  Clem.  Rom.  c.  30. 

"  iv.  1,  VTpaTtvofiivwv. 


A  GLOOMY  PICTURE.  61 

— then,  again,  prayers  utterly  neglected  or  themselves 
tainted  with  sin  because  misdirected  to  reckless  gratifi- 
cation of  pleasure,  and  because  ruined  by  contentious- 
ness ^  and  selfishness — all  this  spiritual  adultery,  the 
divorce  of  the  soul  from  God  to  the  love  of  the  world — 
is  this  indeed  a  picture  of  the  condition  of  Christian 
Churches  within  thirty  years  of  the  death  of  Christ  ? 
Again,  I  see  no  possible  solution  of  the  difficulty 
except  in  the  twofold  answer — partly  that  St.  James 
is  influenced  by  the  state  of  things  which  he  saw 
going  on  around  him  in  Judaea,  and  partly  that 
he  is  drawing  no  marked  line  of  distinction  between 
Jews  and  Christians  in  the  communities  which  he  is 
addressing.^  And  this  being  so,  there  was  certainly  in 
the  Palestine  of  that  day  an  ample  justification  for 
every  line  of  the  dark  delineation.  Alike  among  priests 
and  patriots  there  was  a  fierce  and  luxurious  greed. 
Strifes  about  the  Law  were  loud  and  violent.^  Even  in 
the  days  of  our  Lord,  while  the  tree  of  Jewish  nation- 
ality was  still  green,  and  not  dry,  as  it  had  now 
become,  the  very  Temple  had  been  polluted  into  a 
brigands'  cave.*  The  dagger  of  the  assassin  was  often 
secretly  employed  to  get  rid  of  a  political  opponent.     A 

^  St.  Peter  saw  uo  less  clearly  (1  Pet.  iii.  7)  that  quarrelsomeness  is 
fatal  to  prayer. 

^  It  is  a  weighty  remark  of  Lange  {ad  loc.)  that  "  James  put  this 
Epistle  into  the  hands  of  the  Jewish  Christians  that  it  might  influence  all 
Jews,  as  it  was  a  missionary  instruction  to  the  converted  for  the  uncon- 
verted, and  the  truly  converted  for  the  half-converted." 

^  St.  Paul  (Tit.  iii.  9)  applies  to  these  the  very  word  of  St.  James, 
"  legal  battles "  (^uctxat  vo^jukm).  There  were  the  struggling  sects  of 
Pharisees,  Sadducees,  Essenes,  Herodians,  Samaritans,  etc.  Laurentius 
says — "  Non  loquitur  Apostolus  de  bellis  et  caedibus,  sed  de  mutuis 
dissidiis,  litibus,  jurgiis,  et  contentionibus."  Doubtless  of  these — but  of 
actual  struggles  also 

••  ain]Katov  \ri<nwv,  Matt.  xxi.  13.     Comp.  Mark  xv.  7 ;  Acts  xxi.  38. 


62  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

bloodthirsty  spirit  had  possessed  itself  of  the  once 
peaceful  nation.  Righteousness  had  once  dwelt  in  their 
city,  but  now  murderers.  Men  like  Barabbas  had  become 
heroes  of  the  people.  Men  like  Theudas,  and  Judas,  and 
the  Epygtian  impostor,  were  crowding  the  horizon  of  the 
people's  life,  and  found  no  difficulty  in  leading  after  them 
4,000  men  or  even  murderers.  Zealots  had  increa.sed  in 
numbers  and  in  recklessness.  Bands  of  robbers  were  the 
terror  of  every  district  which  offered  them  hopes  of 
plunder.  Assassins  lurked  in  the  streets,  and  mingled  un- 
noticed in  the  dense  throngs  which  crowded  the  Temple 
courts  at  the  great  annual  festivals.^  Sects  were  arrayed 
in  bitter  envy  against  sects,  and  all  were  united  in 
burning  hatred  against  their  Roman  conquerors.  It 
became  in  popular  estimation  a  pious  act — an  act  which 
even  Hisrh  Priests  could  hail  and  bless — for  sicarii 
to  bind  themselves  under  a  curse  to  waylay  and 
massacre  an  enemy. ^  The  fury  of  fanatical  savagery 
assumed  the  guise  of  patriotism.  False  Christs  and 
false  prophets  abounded  and  flourished,  but  "  Stone 
him,"  and  "Crucify  him,"  and  "Away  with  him,"  and 
"  He  is  not  fit  to  live,"  were  cries  into  which  men 
were  ready  to  burst  at  a  moment's  notice  against 
those  whose  thoughts  had  been  enlightened  to  believe 
in  the  Son  of   God. 

Besides  all  this,  the  world  and  the  interests  of  the 
world  assumed  a  complete  preponderance  in  the 
thoughts  of  all  men ;  the  fear  of  God  seemed  to 
have  been  banished  into  the  far  background  of  life. 
Could  such  men  pray  at  all?  Yes,  and  long  prayers 
and   loud    prayers    in    the    Temple    courts   and   at  the 

1  See  Jo8.  B.  J.  ii.  1,  23;  iv.  10;  vii.  31 ;  Antt.  xviii.  1. 
'  Acts  xxiii.  12. 


ANOMALIES    OF    PRATER.  63 

corners  of  the  streets,  at  the  very  time  when  they  were 
devouring  widows'  houses,  and  making  their  proselytes 
ten-times-worse  children  of  Gehenna  than  themselves. 
There  is  literally  no  end  to  the  anomalies  of  prayers. 
Rochester  went  home  to  pen  a  pious  prayer  in  his  private 
diary  on  the  very  day  that  he  had  been  persuading  his 
sovereign  to  commit  an  open  sin,  Cornish  wreckers 
went  straight  from  church  to  light  their  beacon-fires, 
and  Italian  brigands  promise  to  their  saints  a  share  in 
the  profits  of  their  murders.^  This  "  Italian  piety  "  is 
the  terrible  state  of  moral  apostasy  against  which  St. 
James  speaks  with  all  the  impassioned  sternness  of  one 
of  the  old  prophets.  Like  Amos,  who  had,  no  less  than 
himself,  been  both  a  peasant  and  a  Nazarite,  he  raised 
his  indignant  voice  against  the  luxury  and  idolatry 
of  the  Chosen  People.  It  is  in  the  love  of  the 
world  that  he  sees  the  source  of  all  these  enormi- 
ties, and  it  is  against  this  love  of  the  world,  arrayed 
in  the  golden  robe  of  the  hierarchy,  and  wearing 
"  Holiness  to  the  Lord "  upon  its  forehead — it  is 
against  this  tainted  scrupulosity  and  mitred  atheism 
that  he  speaks  trumpet-tongued. 

ii.  But  besides  these  remarks  on  the  general  purport 
of  the  chapter,  we  must  notice  his  unidentified  quotation. 
The  English  version  renders  it  "  the  spirit  that  dwel- 
leth  in  us  lusteth  to  envy."  The  correct  version,  ac- 
cording to  the  best  reading,  is  probably  as  I  have  given 
it,  "  The  spirit,  which  He  made  to  dwell  in  us,  yearneth 
over  us  jealously."  The  meaning,  then,  is  that  the  guilt 
of  worldly  unfaithfulness  is  enhanced  because  the  Spirit 
of  God,  which  He  hath  given  us,  longs  with  a  jealous 

1  Plumptre,  p.  89. 


64  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

fondness  that  we  should  pay  to  God  an  undivided  alle- 
p^iance,  a  whole-hearted  friendship ;  and  for  that  reason 
He  gives  us  greater  grace — greater  because  of  His 
3'earning  pity  and  love/  But  where  does  this  passage 
occur  in  Scripture  ?  Doubtless  from  the  library  of  the 
writers  of  the  Old  Covenant,  which  forms  our  Old 
Testament,  we  can  produce  analogies,  more  or  less 
distinct,  to  the  general  meaning  of  this  utterance,^ 
but  nowhere  do  we  find  the  exact  words.  Only  two 
solutions  are  therefore  possible — (1)  St.  James  may 
be  quoting  from  some  lost  book,  or  some  apocryphal 
book — like  the  Testament  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs. 
The  suggestion  is  rendered  less  unlikely  by  the 
references  which  he  makes  in  this  Epistle  to  other 
apocryphal  books,^  and  by  the  fact  that  his  brother, 
St.  Jude,  quotes  from  the  Book  of  Enoch."*  We  must 
in  that  case  understand  the  words  97  7/3a0^  in  a  lower 
sense  than  that  which  we  attribute  to  the  Scripture. 
Or  (2)  he  may  be  adopting  the  method,  not  unknown  to 
the  Scripture  writers  and  to  early  Fathers,  of  con- 
centrating  the   meaning  of    several   separate  passages 

1  Here,  as  elsewhere,  I  have  not  thought  it  worth  while  to  trouble  the 
reader  with  masses  of  "  explanations,"  which  torture  out  of  the  words  the 
most  impossible  senses  by  the  most  untenable  methods.  Beza,  Grotius, 
&c.,  make  it  mean  "  the  spirit  of  man  has  a  natural  bias  to  envy,"  but 
eiriiroetl  cannot  bear  this  sense,  nor  that  given  by  Bede,  Calvin,  &c.,  "  Is 
the  Spirit  (of  God)  prone  to  envy?"  nor  that  of  Bengcl,  "the  Spirit 
lusteth  against  envy."  There  is  much  less  objection  to  the  view  of 
Huther,  Wiesinger,  &c.,  "  He  (God)  yearns  jealously  over  the  Spirit  which 
He  has  placed  in  us,  and  gives  groatcr  grace  "  (supra,  p.  60). 

2  It  has  been  variously  referred  to  Gen.  vi.  3,  5 ;  Num.  xi.  29 ;  Ezok. 
xxiii.  25 ;  xxxvi.  27 ;  Deut.  v.  9 ;  xxxii.  10,  11 ;  Ps.  cxix.  20 ;  Prov. 
xxi.  10 ;  Cant.  viii.  6 ;  Ecclus.  iv.  4 ;  Wisd.  vi.  12,  23. 

3  Ecclesiasticus  and  Wisdom.  Similarly  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  makes  distinct  references  to  the  Books  of  Maccabees  (xi. 
37,  38). 

*  Jude  14. 


WARNINGS   AND    REBUKES.  65 

into  one  terse  summary.^  In  that  case  the  word  "saith" 
will  have  to  be  understood  generically  to  mean,  "  Is 
not  this  the  sense  of  Scripture?"  If  .we  adopt  this 
solution,  we  must  suppose  that  the  passages  alluded  to 
are  such  as  Gen.  vi.  3,  "My  spirit  shall  not  always 
strive  with  men;"  or  Deut.  xxxii.  11,  where  God 
describes  His  love  for  Israel  under  the  image  of  an 
eagle  covering  her  young  in  the  nest,  and  bearing  them 
on  her  wings,  and  where  in  the  Septuagint  this  very 
verb  epipothei,  or  "  yearns  over,"  occurs ;  or,  again, 
Ezek.  xxxvi.  27,  "  I  will  put  My  spirit  within  you." 
The  difficulty  cannot  yet  be  considered  to  have  been 
removed,  but  other  methods  of  solving  it  are  far  less 
probable  than  the  two  to  which  I  have  here  referred. 

iii.  Having  thus  shown  their  dangerous  condition, 
he  urges  them,  with  strong  exhortation,  which  reminds 
us  of  the  tone  of  Joel,  to  submission,  moral  effort, 
resistance  of  the  devil,^  the  earnest  seeking  of  God, 
and  deep  humiliation  of  soul,^  which  might  lead  God 
to  interfere  on  their  behalf. 

iv.  Then,  with  a  repetition  of  the  word  "  brethren," 
which  shows  that  his  rebukes  are  being  uttered  in  the 
spirit  of  love,  he  warns  them  once  more  against  evil- 
speaking   as   a    sin  which  is  adverse  to    the  humility 

^  We  find  similar  condensed  quotations  in  Jolin  vii.  33,  42 ;  Matt.  ii.  23 ; 
and  perhaps  Eph.  v.  14.  Dean  Plnmptre  quotes  from  Clemens  Romanus 
(c.  46)  the  curious  passage,  "  It  has  been  written,  '  Cleave  to  the  saints, 
for  they  who  cleave  to  them  shall  be  sanctified.'  " 

^  This  is  one  of  the  few  places  in  the  New  Testament  where  Sm/SoAos 
occurs.  "  Tlie  devil,"  says  Hermas  {Past.  ii.  12),  "  can  wrestle  with  us, 
but  cannot  throw  us ;  if,  then,  thou  resist  him,  he  wiU  be  conquered,  and 
flee  from  thee  utterly  ashamed."     (Matt.  iv.  I — 11.) 

•'He  uses    the   striking  word  KaT^(p€ia — " downcastness  of   face" — 
which  occurs  nowhere  else  in  the  New  Testament.     He  is  thinking  of  tho 
outward  manifestatious  as  the  signs  of  the  inward  humiliation. 
f 


66  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

which  he  has  been  urging  on  them,  since  it  rises  from 
an  imaginary  superiority.  It  arrogantly  usurps  the 
functions  of  God,  who  is  the  one  true  Judge,  because 
He  alone  stands  above  the  Law  on  the  behests  of  which 
we  are  not  capable  of  passing  any  final  judgment.^ 

V.  Passing  to  another  sin,  he  strongly  condemns 
the  braggart  self-confidence"  and  sensual  security  with 
which,  like  the  Rich  Fool  in  the  Parable,  men  make 
gainful  plans  for  the  future  without  any  reference  to 
God,  or  to  His  provident  ordering  of  our  lives,  or  to 
the  fact  that  life  itself  is — or  rather  that  they  them- 
selves are — but  as  a  fleeting  mist.^  They  knew  in  their 
hearts  that  they  ought  not  to  speak  thus.  If  they 
thought  for  a  moment  their  consciences  would  condemn 
them  for  thus  ignoring  all  reference  to  God,  and  this 
was  a  plain  proof  that  it  was  sin*  (iv.  13 — 17). 

^  "  Nostrum  iiou  est  judicare,  praesortim  cum  exsequi  non  possumus  " 
(Bengel).  "  To  offer  to  domineer  over  the  conscience,"  says  the  Emperor 
Maximilian,  "  is  to  assault  the  citadel  of  heaven." 

^  iv.  16.  h.\aC,oviia.  only  in  1  John  ii.  16 :  "  Ye  boast  in  your  vain- 
glorious presumptions." 

'  Job  vii.  7 ;  Ps.  cii.  3 ;  Wisd.  v.  9 — 14.  The  best  reading  is  ar/tls 
7ap  eo-Tf,  "  for  ije  are  a  vapour,"  B,  and  the  Syriac  and  .^thiopic 
versions  (and  practically  A,  K,  for  iarai  must  be  due  to  itacism). 
"  Pulvis  et  umbra  sumus  "  (Hor.).  But  St.  James  turns  the  transitori- 
ness  of  life  to  an  opposite  lesson  from  that  of  the  Epicureans  (Hor. 
Od.  1,  9 ;  1  Cor.  XV.  32). 

*  "  There  shall  no  harm  hajipen  unto  mo  "  (Ps.  x.  6) ;  "  I  shall  die  in 
my  nest"  (Job  xxix.  18).  For  a  Jew  to  talk  thus,  as  if  there  were  no  God, 
or  as  though  Ho  took  no  part  in  the  concerns  of  life,  was  to  run  counter  to 
the  central  thought  of  their  whole  dispensation.  A  sense  of  God's  nearness 
was  the  one  thing  which  more  tlian  all  others  seimrated  tlic  Jews  from  other 
races  as  a  chosen  people.  To  abnegate  this  conviction  in  common  talk  was 
to  show  a  practical  apostasy.  The  Rabbinists  also  felt  this.  In  Debharim 
Babba,  §  9,  a  fatlier  at  his  son's  circumcision  produces  wine  seven  years 
old,  and  says,  "  With  this  wine  wiU  I  continue  for  a  long  time  to  celebrate 
the  birth  of  my  new-bom  son."  That  night  Rabbi  Simoon  meets  the 
Angel  of  Death,  and  asks  him  "  why  he  is  wandering  about."  "  Because," 
said  Asrael,  "  I  »h(y  those  who  saij.  We  will  do  this  or  that,  and  think  not 


REBUKE  OF  THE  RICH.  67 

vi.  Then  in  language  full  of  prophetic  imagery  and 
prophetic  fire,  meant  to  terrify  men  into  thoughts 
of  repentance,  but  not  by  any  means  as  Calvin  too 
characteristically  said,  absque  spe  veniae — "  apart  from 
hope  of  pardon  " — he  bursts  into  terrible  denunciation 
of  the  rich,  which  shows  how  much  his  thoughts  had 
dwelt  upon  their  arrogant  rapacity. 

"  Go  to  now,  ye  rich,  weep,  howling^  over  your  miseries  that  are 
coming  upon  you.  Your  riches  are  rotted,  and  your  garments  have 
become  moth-eaten.  Your  gold  and  your  silver  is  rusted  through 
and  through,^  and  the  rust  of  them  shall  be  for  a  witness  to  you,3 
and  shall  eat  your  flesh*  as  fire.  Ye  treasured  up  in  the  last  days.^ 
So  the  pay  of  your  labourers,  who  reaped  your  fields,  the  pay  kept 
back  by  fraud,  cries  aloud  from  you,"  and  the  cries  of  the  reapers 

how  soon  death  raay  overtake  them.  The  man  who  said  he  would  driuk 
that  wine  often  shall  die  in  thirty  days."  From  this  verse,  and  from 
1  Cor.  iv.  19,  "  I  will  come  quickly  to  you,  if  God  will,"  has  come  the 
common  phrase,  "  Deo  volente." 

^  Only  in  Isa.  xiii.  6 ;  xiv.  31 ;  xv.  3 ;  xxxiii. ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  The 
language  must  be  judged  from  the  standpoint  of  prophetical  analogies  in 
Isaiah,  Amos,  &c.,  and  also  in  Matt,  xxiii. ;  Rev.  xviii.  And  the  warnings, 
like  aU  God's  warnings,  are  hypothetical  (Jonah  iii.  10;  Jer.  xviii.  7 — 10). 

2  V.  2.  The  perfects  are  prophetic  perfects;  they  express  absolute 
certainty  as  to  the  ultimate  result.  Karloorai  is  another  hapax  legomenon 
(except  Ecclus.  xii.  11),  as  are  a-fa-Tjirfv  (Ecclus.  xiv.  19)  and  ar)r6fipwTa  in 
tliis  verse.  Gold  and  silver  do  not  rust,  but  the  expression  is  perfectly 
intelligible  (Isa.  i.  22,  "  Thy  sUver  has  become  dross  "). 

'  "  In  their  tarnish  and  consumption  you  may  see  a  picture  of  what 
will  come  on  you."  "  Magna  vanitas !  thesaurisat  moriturus  morituris  " 
(Aug.). 

*  raj  adpKas  (plur.)  has  been  taken  to  mean  "your  bloated  bodies,"  &c., 
but  occurs  in  Lev.  xxvi.  29,  &c. 

5  There  was  much  worldly  prosperity  and  ostentatious  legalism  at  this 
epoch.  Some  take  ws  irvp  after  fSTjo-aup/o-are — "  your  treasury  of  gold  is  in 
reality  a  treasury  of  fire." 

^  "  From  you,"  i.e.,  from  your  hands  or  treasures.  Ecclus.  xxxiv.  22, 
"  He  that  taketh  away  his  neighbour's  living  slayeth  him,  and  he  that 
defraudeth  the  labourer  of  his  hire  is  a  blood-shedder "  (comp.  Gen. 
iv.  10 ;  Deut.  xxiv.  14,  15 ;  Jer.  xxii.  13 ;  Mai.  iii.  5).  The  rendering  of 
the   E.  Y.,    "kept   back  by   you,"   is  also    tenable.      The   tract  Succah 

/2 


68  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

have  entered  into  the  ears  of  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth.'  Ye  luxuriated 
on  the  earth  and  waxed  wanton,  ye  fattened  your  hearts  in  a  day  of 
slaughter.2  Ye  condemned,  ye  killed  the  just  man.  He  doth  not 
resist  you''  (v.  1 — 6). 

"  Be  patient,  therefore,  brethren,  until  the  coming  of  the  Lord.* 
So  the  husbandman  awaiteth  the  precious  fruit  of  the  earth,  being 
patient  over  it  until  he  receive  the  early  and  latter  rain.*  Be 
patient  then,  ye  also,  stablish  your  hearts  because  the  coming  of  the 
Lord  is  near  "  (v.  7,  8). 

vii.  Here  again  we  ask,  Of  whom  is  the  Prophet 
thinking?  Were  there  indeed,  in  those  early  days  of 
Christianity,  any — still  more,  could  there  have  been 
many — who  correspond  to  this  picture  of  voluptuous 
and  fraudful  wantonness,  which  had  forgotten  God  and 
was  so  cruel  and  false  to  men  ?  Surely  St.  Paul  gives 
us  the  answer  when  he  says,  "  Consider  your  calling, 
brethren.  Not  many  of  you  are  wise  after  the  flesh  ; 
not  many  mighty,  not  many  noble  ""^ — and  therefore 
certainly  not  many  rich — "  are  called."  In  those  early 
congregations  of  slaves  and  sufferers  there  was  little 
to  attract,  there  was  everything  to  repel,  the  ordinary 

(f.  29,  &)  gives  four  reasQns  why  the  avaricious  lose  their  goods,  which 
are  (11  because  they  keep  back  the  pay  of  their  laboiirers ;  (2)  because  they 
neglect  their  welfare ;  (3)  because  they  shift  burdens  upon  them ;  (4) 
because  of  pride. 

'  The  form  of  expression  (used  by  no  other  New  Testament  writer, 
except  in  a  quotiition,  Rom.  ix.  29)  is  characteristically  Judaic.  The 
LXX.  rendering  is  mostly  -iravTOKpaTwp.  See  Bp.  Pearson  On  the  Creed. 
Art..  1. 

-  Like  cattle  grazing  in  rich  pastures  on  the  day  that  they  are  doomed 
to  bleed  (Tlicilo)  ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  1—10. 

^  Hos.  iv.  17  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  24  ;  Isa.  Jiii.  7.  This  makes  the  conclusion  of 
the  clause  far  more  striking  than  tlio  proposed  renderings,  "  Does  he  not 
set  himself  in  array  against  you  P  "  or  "  bring  the  armies  against  you  ?" 

*  This  must  be  a  reference  to  Christ's  coming. 

^  The  former  in  winter,  the  latter  in  spring  (Deut.  xi.  14 ;  Jer.  iii.  3 ; 
v.  24  ;  Joel  ii.  23). 

8  1  Cor.  i.  26. 


WHO  WERE   "THE   RICH"?  69 

multitude  of  the  wealthy.  In  those  days  the  truth  of 
the  Lord's  words  was  seen,  "  How  hardly  shall  they 
that  have  riches — how  hardly  shall  they  who  trust  in 
riches — enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven."  The 
"  deceitfulness  of  riches  "  became  very  manifest,  and 
the  "  woe  unto  you  that  are  rich "  was  seen  in  its  full 
meaning.  Rich  men,  indeed,  there  were  in  the  Church, 
as  there  had  been  since  Nicodemus  and  Joseph  of  Arima- 
thsea  brought  their  costly  spices  to  the  tomb  ;  for  St. 
Paul  in  one  of  his  latest  Epistles  could  give  a  charge  to 
the  rich  not  to  be  arrogant,  and  not  to  trust  in  the 
uncertainty  of  riches.^  But  considering  what  a  Chris- 
tian had  in  those  days  to  suffer,  is  it  conceivable  that 
any  of  the  few  rich  men  who  had  ventured  to  bear  the 
reproach  of  the  cross  would  have  lived  the  haughty, 
greedy,  oppressive  life  of  the  men  on  whom  S.t.  James 
here  hurls  his  unsparing  denunciation  ?  So  strongly  has 
this  difficulty  been  felt  that  some,  once  more,  see  in  "the 
rich"  only  a  symbol  of  the  proud,  haughty,  exclusive, 
self-satisfied  religionist  -^  but  though  the  words  "  rich  " 
and  ''poor"  may  not  be  confined  to  their  literal 
senses — yet  certainly  the  literal  sense  is  not  excluded. 
Once  more,  I  see  the  explanation  of  his  passion,  the 
moving  cause  of  his  righteous  menaces,  in  the  conduct 
of  the  leading  classes  at  Jerusalem — the  gorgeously  clad 
Herodians,  the  aristocratic  Sadducees.  The  extracts 
from  the  Talmudists  which  I  have  given  on  a  previous 
page  describe  their  conduct,  and  will  show  what  bitter 
need  there' was  for  the  language  which  St.  James  em- 
ploys. 

1  1  Tim.  V.  17. 

-  Comp.  Rev.  ii.  9;  iii.  17;  and  see  1  Sam.  ii.  8;  Ps.  Ixxii.  13:  Amos 
ii.  r. ;  Luke  i.  52,  53 ;  vi.  20,  &c. 


70  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

Nor  is  Josephus  less  emphatic. 

"  About  this  time,"  he  says,  "  King  Agrippa  gave 
the  high  priesthood  to  Ishmael  Ben  Phabi.  And  now 
arose  a  sedition  on  the  part  of  the  chief  priests  against 
the  priests  and  the  leaders  of  the  multitude  at  Jeru- 
salem. Each  of  them  gathered  around  himself  a  com- 
pany of  the  boldest  innovators  and  became  their  leader. 
And  when  they  came  into  collision  they  both  abused 
each  other  and  flung  stones.  There  was  no  one  to 
keep  them  in  awe,  but  all  these  things  went  on  with 
a  high  hand  as  though  in  a  city  where  there  was 
anarchy.  And  such  impudence  and  audacity  seized  the 
chief  priests  that  they  even  dared  to  send  slaves  to  the 
threshing-floors  to  seize  the  tithes  due  to  the  priests. 
And  it  happened  that  some  of  the  priests  died  of  want 
from  being  deprived  of  their  sustenance,  so  completely 
did  the  violence  of  the  seditious  prevail  over  all 
justice."^ 

viii.  And  if  these  words  of  St.  James  were  addressed  to 
Jews  and  Jewish  Christians  about  the  year  a.d.  61,  how 
speedily  were  his  warnings  fulfilled,  how  terribly  and 
how  soon  did  the  retributive  doom  fall  on  these  wealth}-, 
luxurious  tyrants  !  A  few  years  later  Vespasian  invaded 
Juda3a.  Truly  there  was  need  to  howl  and  weep  when, 
amid  the  horrors  caused  by  the  rapid  approach  of  the 
Roman  armies,  the  gold  and  silver  of  the  wealthy  op- 
pressors was  useless  to  buy  bread,  and  they  had  to  lay 
up,  for  the  moth  to  eat,  those  gorgeous  robes  which  it 
would  have  been  a  peril  and  a  mockery  to  wear.  The 
worshippers  at  the  last  fatal  Passover  became  the 
victims.       The   rich    only    were   marked   out    for    the 

*  Jos.  Antt.  XX.  8,  §  8.  He  repeats  the  same  complaints  against  Joshua, 
son  of  Gamala,  in  xx.  9,  §  2. 


MURDER  OF  "THE  JUST."  71 

worst  fury  of  the  Zealots,  and  their  wealth  sank  into 
the  flames  of  the  burning  city.  Useless  were  their 
treasures  in  those  "  last  days,"  when  there  was  heard 
at  the  very  doors  the  thundering  summons  of  the 
Judge  !  In  all  their  rich  banquets  and  full-fed  revel- 
ling they  had  but  fattened  themselves  as  human 
offerings  for  that  day  of  slaughter !  The  Jewish 
historian  here  becomes  the  best  commentator  on  the 
prophecies  of  the  Christian  Apostle. 

ix.  "  Ye  condetnned,  ye  murdered  the  just ^  The  aorist 
tenses  of  the  original  may  point  equally  well  to  some 
single  act,  or  to  a  series  of  single  acts  ;  and  "the  just 
man  "  was  a  title  of  every  devout  and  faithful  Israelite. 
The  present  tense,  "  he  doth  not  resist  you " — so 
abruptly  and  pathetically  introduced — seems  to  show  that 
St.  James  is  alluding  to  a  general  state  of  things.  In  the 
delivery  of  Christ  to  the  Gentiles  the  Jewish  Church 
had  slain  "that  Just  One;"^  and  since  His  death  they 
had  consented  to  the  murder  of  His  saints  in  the 
stoning  of  Stephen,  and  the  beheading  of  James,  the 
son  of  Zebedee.  But  in  the  scantiness  of  the  records  of 
the  early  Church  of  Jerusalem  there  is  too  much  reason 
to  fear  that  there  was  a  crowd  of  obscurer  martyrs.^ 
And  Christ  suffered,  as  it  were,  again  in  the  person  of 
His  saints.  When  they  were  murdered  He  was,  as  it 
were,  led  once  more  to  unresisted  sacrifice.  And  now 
St.  James  himself  bore  pre-eminently  the  title  of  "  the 
Just."  His  words  might  seem  to  have  been  prophetic 
of  his  own  rapidly-approaching  fate,  while  yet  they 
tacitly  repudiate  the  title  by  which  he  was  called,  to 

'  Acts  vii.  52. 

2  Acts  xxvi.  10.     "  When  they  were  coudemued  to  Aeaih^  says  St. 
Paul,  "  1  gave  my  voice  against  them;" 


72  THE  EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

confer  it  on  Him  who  alone  is  worthy  of  it.  But  the 
state  of  things  which  he  is  describing  was  by  no  means 
isolated.  It  had  been  already  described  at  length  in 
the  language  of  a  book  which  also  belonged  to  this 
epoch,  and  with  which  St.  James  has  more  than  once 
shown  himself  to  be  familiar. 

"  For  the  ungodly  said  .  .  .  Come  on  therefore,  let  us  enjoy 
the  good  things  that  are  present;  and  let  us  speedily  use  the  creatures 
as  in  youth.  Let  us  fill  ourselves  with  costly  wine  and  ointments, 
and  let  no  flower  of  the  spring  pass  by  us ;  let  none  of  us  go  without 
his  portion  of  our  voluptuousness — let  us  oppress  the  poor  riyhteovs 
man  .  .  .  for  that  which  is  feeble  is  found  to  be  nothing  worth. 
Let  us  lie  in  wait  for  the  righteous.  He  professeth  to  have  the 
knowledge  of  God,  and  he  calleth  himself  the  child  of  the  Lord.  He 
was  made  to  reprove  our  thoughts.  We  are  esteemed  of  him  as 
counterfeits.  He  pronounceth  the  end  of  the  just  to  be  blessed,  and 
maketh  his  boast  that  God  is  his  Father.  Let  us  examine  him  with 
despitefulness  and  torture,  that  we  may  know  his  meekness  and  prove 
his  patiejice.  Let  us  condemn  him  with  a  shameful  death,  for  by 
his  own  saying  he  shall  be  respected  "  (Wisd.  ii.  6 — 20) 

X.  But  all  such  warnings  proved  vain.  Nay,  it  is 
probable  that  they  only  precipitated  the  fate  of  the 
speaker,  and  that  he,  like  other  prophets,  felt  the 
vengeance  of  those  whose  unrepented  sins  he  so  un- 
sparingly denounced.^  When  the  priests  had  murdered 
James  the  Just,  not  resisting  them,  but  praying  for 
them,  the  day  for  warning  had  passed  away  for  ever, 
and  over  a  guilty  city  and  a  guilty  nation  History 
pronounced  once  more  her  awful  verdict  of  "  Too  late." 

"  Ye  condemned,  ye  murdered  the  just.  He  re- 
sisteth  you  not."^      "And  thus,"   says  Wiesinger,  "we 

*  Hegesippus,  ap.  Eusob.  ii.  23 ;  Origeu,  c.  Ceh.  i.  48 ;  Jer.  De  Virr. 
Illustr.  ii. 

2  Comp.  Amos  v.  12 :  '•  They  afflict  the  just  ....  therefore  the 
prudent  shall  keep  silence  in  that  time." 


"  WAIT  ! "  73 

have,  as  it  were,  standing  before  us  the  slain  and  unre- 
sisting righteous  man,  when,  lo  !  the  curtain  falls.  Be 
patient,  brethren,  wait !  "  The  coming  of  the  Lord  for 
which  they  had  to  wait  was  not  far  distant.  The 
husbandman  had  to  wait  in  patience,  and  often  in 
disappointment,  for  the  early  and  latter  rain.  Let  them 
learn  by  his  example.  But  since  the  Judge  was  standing 
already  before  the  doors,^  let  them,  that  they  might 
escape  His  condemnation,  not  only  bear  with  patience 
the  afflictions  of  persecutors,  but  also  abstain  from 
murmuring  at  each  other's  conduct.^  It  was  patience 
that  they  needed  most ;  patience  with  one  another, 
patience  under  external  trials.  As  an  example  of  that 
patience,  let  them  take  the  prophets,  and  let  the  Book 
of  Job^  remind  them  that  in  the  end  Grod  ever  vindi- 
cates His  attributes  of  compassionate  tenderness.^ 

xi.  His  task  is  now  done,  but  he  adds  a  few  need- 
ful admonitions.  Let  them  avoid  all  rash  and  needless 
oaths,  and  be  simple  in  their  affirmations.^  Let  them 
be  more  fervent  in  prayer. 

^  Some  have  fancied  that  the  question  tauntingly  asked  of  St.  James 
in  the  story  of  his  martyrdom  in  Hegesippus — "  Which  is  the  door 
of  Jesus  ?  " — had  reference  to  this  saying  of  his  ;  as  though  they  would 
ask,  "  By  which  door  will  Christ  come  to  judge  ?  " ;  but  it  more  probably 
refers  to  John  x.  7 — 9  (see  Gieseler,  Ch.  Hist.  §  31). 

2  A  clear  reference  to  Matt.  vii.  1  {fjt.ri  ffrevdCeTe  kut'  oXAtjAwj/)  ;  lit., 
"groan  not  against  one  another."  The  E.  V.  "grudge,"  once  meant 
"mui-mur"  (see  Ps.  lix.  15);  "he  eats  his  meat  without  grudging" 
"(Shakesp.  Much  Ado,  iii.  4,  90). 

^  Here  alone  referred  to  in  the  New  Testament,  though  quoted  in 
1  Cor.  iii.  19,  and  by  Philo,  De  Mutat.  Nom.  xxiv. 

*  V.  9 — 11.  Others  interpret  "  Te  have  seen  the  end  of  the  Lord,"  to 
mean,  "  Ye  saw  the  death  of  Christ,"  as  in  1  Pet.  ii.  22 — 25 ;  iroKva-irAayxvos 
is  yet  another  unique  expression  for  f<i(rir\ayxvos  (Eph.  iv.  32;  1  Pet.  iii.  b). 
otKTip/j.wv  occurs  in  Ecclus.  ii.  13 ;  Luke  vi.  36. 

•''  Comp.  Matt.  V.  35,  36.  Jews  (unlike  Christians,  alas  ! )  were  not 
likely  to  take  God's  name  in  vain.  "That  ye  fall  not  into  judgment"; 
the  reading  ds  vir6Kpia-iv,  gives  a  worse  sense,  and  is  not  well  supported. 


74  THE   EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

"  Is  any  one  among  you  in  aflfliction  t  Let  him  pray.  Is  any 
cheerful  1  Let  him  sing  praise.  Is  any  sick  among  you  1  Let  him 
summon  the  elders  of  the  Church,  and  let  them  pray  over  him, 
anointing  him  with  oil  ^  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,^  and  the  prayer  of 
faith  shall  save  the  sick  man,  and  the  Lord  shall  raise  him  (from  his 
bed  of  sickness,  Acts  ix.  34).^  Even  if  he  shall  have  committed  sin, 
it  shall  be  remitted  him.  Confess  then  to  one  another*  your  trans- 
gressions, and  pray  for  one  another,  that  ye  may  be  healed.*  Much 
availeth  the  supplication  of  a  just  man,  when  it  worketh  with  energy. 
Elias  was  a  man  of  like  passions  with  us,^  and  he  pi'ayed  earnestly 
that  it  might  not  rain,  and  it  rained  not  upon  the  earth  three  years 
and  six  months.'  And  again  he  prayed,  and  the  heaven  gave  rain, 
and  the  earth  brought  forth  her  fruit."" 

^  A  common  Eastern  therapeutic,  as  we  see  from  Isa.  i.  6 ;  Mark  vi. 
13  ;  Luke  x.  34 ;  Jos.  B.  J.  i.  33,  §  5  ;  Antt.  xvii.  6,  §  5.  It  was  also  used 
by  Romans  (Pliny,  H.  N.  xxxi.  47).  The  use  of  oil  for  bodily  healing  is 
retained  by  the  Eastern  Church. 

2  That  is,  of  Christ  (Matt,  xxviii.  19 ;  Acts  ii.  38 ;  iii.  16 ;  iv.  10 ; 
1  Cor.  i.  13—15). 

^  "  Nisi  mempe  aliter  ei  suppeditat  ad  aetemam  salutem  "  (Grotius). 
In  the  first  Prayer-book  of  Edward  VI.  the  anointing  was  accompanied  by 
the  prayer :  "  Oiu*  Heavenly  Fatlier  vouchsafe  for  His  great  mercy  {if  it  6'' 
His  blessed  will)  to  restore  to  thee  thy  bodily  health."  The  prayer  will 
not  be  thrown  away ;  it  will  be  answered  as  is  best  for  us  and  the  sufferer. 
How  much  connexion  this  has  with  Extreme  Unction  (of  which  with  an 
anathema  the  Council  of  Trent  commanded  it  to  be  understood)  may  be 
seen  from  the  fact  that  extreme  imction  is  forbidden,  except  in  Ciises  in 
which  recovery  seems  quite  hopeless. 

*  In  the  manipulation  of  this  text  by  Cornelius  a  Lapide,  "to  one 
another"  becomes  "to  a  priest"  ("frater  fratri  confitemini,  ^ttfa  sacer- 
doti").  Confession  in  sickness  is  also  enjoined  in  the  Talmud  (Shabbath. 
f.  32,  a). 

^  "  When  Rabba  fell  sick  he  bade  his  family  publish  it  abroad,  that 
they  who  hated  liim  might  rejoice,  and  that  they  icho  loved  him  might 
intercede  with  God  for  him'"  (Nedarim,  f.  40,  a).  "The  wise  men  have 
said,  No  healing  is  equal  to  that  which  comes  from  the  Word  of  God  and 
prayer  "  (Sepher  Ha  Chayim). 

"  Acts  xiv.  15. 

"^  Luke  iv.  25.  This  period  (42  months,  1.260  days — comp.  Rev.  xi.  3) 
was  mentioned  by  the  Jewish  tradition  (Yalkut  Siraeoni),  and  is  per- 
fectly consistent  with  fair  inferences  from  1  Kings  xviii. 

•*  V.  13 — 18.  Thus  the  prayer  of  Elijah  was  one  of  mercy  as  well  as 
one  of  judgment.     Dean  Plumptre  thinks  that  St.  James  may  have  had  in 


ANOINTING  WITH  OIL.  76 

The  leading  idea  of  this  passage,  which  Lange  most 
needlessly  allegorises,  is  the  efficacy  of  Christian  prayer. 
The  course  which  St.  James  recommends  in  cases  of 
sickness  is  natural  and  beautiful,  and  in  the  small  num- 
bers of  the  Christian  communities  could  be  easily  followed. 
It  is  the  advice  of  which  the  entire  spirit  is  carried 
out  in  our  service  for  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick.  We 
no  longer,  indeed,  anoint  with  oil,  because  we  do  not 
live  in  Palestine  or  in  the  first  century.^  The  thera- 
peutic means  of  one  climate  and  age  are  not  necessarily 
the  best  to  be  adopted  in  another,  but  prayer  belongs  to 
all  countries  and  all  times,  and  the  mutual  confession 
of  sins  is  often  helpful.  We  must  always  distinguish 
between  the  letter  and  the  spirit,  the  accidental  adjunct 
and  the  eternal  principle.  If  this  passage  has  been  per- 
verted into  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  extreme  unction 
regarded  as  a  sacrament,^  and  of  sacramental  confession 
to  a  priest,  it  has  only  shared  the  fate  of  hundreds  of 
other  passages.  There  are  few  prominent  texts  on 
which   the   tottering   structures    of    purely  inferential 

mind  the  sudden  burst  of  rain  after  drought  which  fell  in  answer  to  prayer 
after  the  troubles  caused  by  the  attempt  of  Caligula  to  set  up  his  statue 
in  the  Temple  (Jos.  Antt.  xviii.  8,  §  6).  Analogous  to  this  is  the  story  of 
the  Thundering  Legion  (Euseb.  H.  E.  y.  5;  Tert.  Apol.  5),  and  the  weU- 
known  story  of  Mr.  Grimshaw.  Hegesippus  says  of  James  himself, 
that  it  was  supposed  by  the  people  that  he  caused  rain  to  fall  by  his 
prayers. 

1  "  Things  which  were  practised  and  prescribed  by  Christ  Himself  and 
His  Apostles  are  not  of  perpetual  obligation  unless  they  are  conducive  to 
an  end  which  is  of  perpetual  necessity." — Bp.  Wordsworth,  who  instances 
feet-washing  (John  xiii.  14)  and  the  Kiss  of  Peace  (1  Thess.  v.  26 ;  1  Pet. 
V.  14). 

2  Anointing  with  oil  was  provided  for  in  the  first  Prayer-book  of 
Edward  VI.,  "if  the  sick  man  desire  it";  but  as  no  miraculous  results 
can  follow,  and  as  oil  is  not  specially  valuable  in  our  climate  as  a  means 
of  healing  in  all  diseases,  it  was  wisely  dropped  in  tlie  Prayer-book 
of  1552  (see  Jer.  Taylor's  Preface  to  Holy  Dying). 


76  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

dogmas  have  not  been  reared.  Thus  do  men  build 
upon  Divine  foundations  the  hay  and  stubble  of  human 
fancies.  And  if  the  passage  has  thus  been  perverted 
in  one  direction  by  the  growth  of  sacerdotalism,  it  has 
been  perverted  in  another  by  the  fanaticism  of  ignorance. 
Because  the  promises  of  healing  given  by  St.  James 
are  unconditional,  it  has  been  assumed  by  some  poor 
fanatics  that  no  one  need  ever  die,  as  though  death,  in 
God's  good  time,  were  not  man's  richest  birthright, 
and  as  though  every  good  man's  prayer  for  any  earthly 
blessing  was  not  in  itself  made  absolutely  conditional 
on  the  will  of  God.^  But  neither  for  extreme  unction, 
nor  for  sacramental  confession,  nor  for  sacerdotal  abso- 
lution,^ nor  for  fanatical  extravagance,  does  this  passage 
afford  the  slightest  sanction.  Such  inferences  are  only 
possible  to  the  exegesis  which  takes  the  sound  of  the 
words,  and  not  their  true  meanings.  The  lessons  which 
we  must  here  learn  are  lessons  of  the  blessedness  of 
sympathy,  and  of  holy  intercourse,  and  of  the  humble 
confession  of  sin,  and,  above  all,  of  prayer,  at  all  times, 
but  most  of  all  in  times  of  sickness.  Our  faith,  too, 
may  find  encouragement  in  the  efficacy  of  prayer  for 
the  achievement  of  results  which  even  transcend  the 
ordinary  course  of  nature.  In  enforcing  this  faith  by  the 
example  of  Elijah,^  St.  James  does  so  on  the  express 
ground  that,  saint  though  he  was,  and  prophet  though 

'  (Ecnmonixis,  on  the  other  hand,  has  no  warrant  for  confining  the 
reference  of  the  verse  to  miraculous  healings  in  tlie  days  of  tlio  Apostles 
(the  x«P'o"Mo  <a/tc^Ta)i/,  1  Cor.  xii.  9). 

2  Even  Cardinal  Cajetan  admits,  witli  perfect  frankness :  "  Haec 
verba  non  hxjnuntur  de  Sacramontali  Unctioue  extremae  unctionis — nee  hie 
est  sorino  de  confessione  sacraniejitali." 

2  It  is  implied  in  1  Kings  xviii.  42.  »eq.,  that  Elijah  prayed  for  rain. 
It  was  the  Jewish  tradition  tliat  he  also  prayed  for  the  drought,  but 
Scripture  does  not  say  so.     He  auuounced  it  (1  Kings  xni.  1). 


CONVERTING  WANDERERS.  77 

he  was,  lie  was  no  supernatural  being,  but  one  "  of  like 
passions  "  with  ourselves. 

xii.  Then,  in  one  last  weighty  word,  comes  the 
solemn  close  of  the  Epistle. 

"My  brethren,  if  any  one  among  you  wander  from  the  truth, 
and  one  convert  him,  know  that  he  who  has  converted  a  sinner  from 
the  error  of  his  way  shall  save  a  soul  from  death,  and  shall  covei-  a 
multitude  of  sins"  (v.  19,  20). 

He  has  spoken  many  words  of  warning  and  con- 
demnation against  the  worldliness,  the  violence,  the 
forgetfulness  of  God,  which  were  but  too  prevalent 
among  Jewish  and  Christian  communities,  and  he 
has  given  many  an  exhortation  to  patience,  and 
dehortation  from  iniquity.  But  this  last  word  is  a 
word  to  those  who  were  most  faithful,  and  is  meant 
to  stimulate  them  to  the  best  and  most  blessed  of  all 
duties — the  endeavour  to  help  and  save  the  souls  of 
others.  No  reward  could  equal  that  of  success  in  such 
a  task.^  To  hide  as  with  the  gracious  veil  of  penitence 
and  forgiveness  the  many  sins  of  a  sinner  was  a  Christ- 
like service,  and  he  who  was  enabled  to  render  it  would 
share  in  the  joy  of  Christ.  And  may  not  the  thought 
be  at  least  involved  that  in  covering  the  sins  of  another 
he  would  also  be  helping  to  cover  his  own — that  he 
who  waters  others  shall  be  watered  also  himself  ?^ 

1  Ps.  xxxii.  1,  2 ;  Ixxxv.  2 ;  Noh.  iv.  5  ;  Prov.  x.  12  ;  1  Pet.  iv.  8.  "  He 
commends  tho  corroction  of  brothers  from  its  result,  that  we  may  more 
eagerly  devote  ourselves  to  it  "  (Calvin).  A  faint  analogy  occurs  iuToma. 
f.  87  a,  "  Wlioever  leads  many  to  righteousness,  sin  is  not  committed  by 
his  liands." 

-  "  Whosoever  dcstroyeth  one  soul  of  Israel,  Scripture  counts  it  to  him 
as  though  ho  had  destroyed  tho  whole  world ;  and  whoso  presorv'etli  one 
soul  of  Israel,  Scripture  coimts  it  as  though  ho  had  preserved  the  whole 
world "  (Sanliedrin,  f.  37,  a).  R.  Meyer  said — "  Great  is  repentance, 
because  for  the   sake   of   one    that   truly   repouteth,  the  whole  world  is 


78  THE   EARLY   DATS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

And  there,  as  with  a  seal  affixed  to  a  testament/  he 
ends.  He  would  leave  that  thought  last  in  their  minds, 
and  would  suffer  neither  greetings  nor  messages  to 
weaken  the  force  of  the  injunction,  or  the  supremacy  of 
the  blessing  by  which  he  would  encourage  them  to  its 
fulfilment.  "  Insigni  doctrind,  velut  coloplione  epistolam 
absolcit."  ^ 

pardoned  (Hos.  xiv.  4)  "  (Yoma,  f.  86,  h).     How  much  wiser  and  more 
controlled  is  the  language  of  St.  James  ! 

^  Herder.  -  Zuinglius. 


CHAPTER    XXIII. 


ST.    JAMES    AND    ST.    PAUL    ON    FAITH    AND    WORKS. 

"  Thy  works  and  alms  and  all  thy  good  endeavour 
Staid  not  behind,  nor  in  the  grave  were  trod  ; 
But,  as  Faith  pointed  with  her  golden  rod, 
Followed  thee  up  to  joy  and  bliss  for  ever." — Milton. 

Our  sketch  of  '  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  cannot 
conclude  without  a  few  words  on  the  famous  pas- 
sage in  which,  it  has  been  supposed,  the  Bishop  of 
Jerusalem  deliberately  contravenes  and  argues  against 
the  most  characteristic  formula  of  the  Apostle  of  the 
Gentiles.^ 

Let  us  first  place  side  by  side  the  passages  which 
are  in  most  direct  apparent  contradiction  : 


"  .  .  .  if  Abraham  were  justi- 
fied by  works,  he  hath  whereof 
to  glory,  but  not  before  God " 
(Rom.  iv.  2). 

"  Therefore,  being  justified  by 
faith,  we  have  peace  with  God 
through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  " 
(Rom.  V.  1). 

"  By  grace  are  ye  saved  thro' 
faith  .  .  .  not  of  loorks,  lest  any 
man  should  boast "  (Eph.  ii.  8,  9). 

"  Therefore  we  conclude  that  a 
man  is  justified  by  faith  vnthout 
the  deeds  of  the  law "  (Rom.  iii. 


"  Was  not  Abraham  our  father 
justified  by  ivorks  when  he  had 
offered  Isaac  his  son  upon  the 
altar?"  (Jas.  ii.  21). 

"  What  doth  it  profit,  my  breth- 
ren, though  a  man  say  he  hath 
faith,  and  have  not  works  1  Can 
the  faith  save  him?"  (Jas.  ii.  14). 

"...  Faith,  if  it  hath  not 
ivorks,  is  dead,  being  alone " 
(Jas.  ii.  17). 

"  Ye  see,  then,  how  that  by 
works  a  man  is  justified,  and  not 
by  faith  only  "  (Jas.  ii,  24). 


28). 

'  I  have  consulted  the  treatment  of  this  subject  by  Luther,  Bengel, 
Jer.  Taylor  (Sermon  iii.  "  Fides  formata"),  Burrow  [Sermon  on  Justify- 


80  THE    EARLY   DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

It  is  hardly  strange  that  the  opposite  character  of 
these  statements  should  have  attracted  deep  attention, 
and  of  late  years  there  have  been  two  distinct  views 
respecting  them. 

(1.)  One  is  that  the  passages  involve  a  real  and 
even  intentional  contradiction/  Baur,  while  holding 
that  St.  James  meant  to  oppose  the  formula)  of  St. 
Paul,  or  of  his  School,  yet  speaks  with  moderation. 
He  believes  that  St.  James's  arguments  were  not  so 
much  meant  to  be  polemical  as  corrective  of  misappre- 
hensions, and  therefore  that  they  were  dictated  by  the 
true  spirit  of  catholic  unity.  Others,  however,  and 
notably  the  advanced  members  of  the  TUbingen  School, 
regard  the  Epistle  as  a  bitter  manifesto  of  Judaising 
Christians  against  the  Paulinists."  The  research  and 
insight  of  Baur  led  him  to  a  real  discovery  when  he 
pointed  out  the  importance  of  the  contest  between 
the  Judaisers  and  the  Paulinists.  Those  who  pushed 
liis  views  to  an  extreme  were  prepared  to  sacrifice 
the  entire  historical  credibility  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  in  order  to  make  out  that  St.  James  and  St. 
Paul,  or  at  least  their  immediate  followers,  hated  each 
other  with  irreconcilable  opposition.  They  thought,  in 
fact,  that  in  the  Clementine  Homilies,  with  their  strong 
animus  against  St.  Paul,  they  had  discovered  the  true 
key  to  the  early  history  of  the  Church.     They  attributed 

ing  Faith),  De  Wettc  (wliose  note  is  quoted  in  Alford,  ad  loc),  tLarc  {Vindi- 
cation of  Luther),  Bishop  Lightfoot,  Phimptre,  Dean  Bagot,  Wordswortli. 
Ewald,  Lange,  Pfleideror,  Baur,  Wiesingor,  Hutlior,  Sohaff,  Reuss,  Im- 
mer  {N.  Test.  Theoh),  Ncaudor,  and  other  writers. 

'  Luther,  Cyril  Luear,  Strc>l)el,  Kern,  Baur,  Scliwegler,  Ronan. 

-  The  notion  tliat  Jas.  iii.  13 — IS,  and  the  praise  of  the  wisdom  wliioh 
is  "earthly,  unspiritual,  deniouish,"  is  a  refloetiou  on  1  Cor.  ii.  li.  15 
(Hilgenfeld,  Einleit.  530)  is  very  baseless. 


JUDAISTS  AND  PAULINISTS.  81 

to  the  Apostles  themselves  heretical  slanders  which 
they  would  have  rejected  with  astonished  indigna- 
tion. They  think  that  three  of  the  Apostles — St. 
James,  St.  John,  and  St.  Jude — were  Judaists,  who  not 
only  took  an  impassioned  part  in  the  controversies 
which  were  excited  by  the  actions  of  St.  Paul,  but 
have  even  recorded  their  abhorrence  of  his  views  upon 
the  Sacred  page.  In  their  opinion,  it  is  St.  Paul  at 
whom  St.  James  is  aiming  one  of  the  bitterest  terms 
of  Hebrew  condemnation  when  he  exclaims,  "  But  art 
thou  willing  to  recognise,  0  empty  person^  that  faith 
without  works  is  dead  ? "  The  Epistle  of  St.  Jude 
becomes,  in  their  view,  a  specimen  of  the  "  hatred- 
breathing  Epistles "  which  were  despatched  to  the 
Jewish  Churches  by  the  heads  of  the  Mother  Church 
in  Jerusalem,  to  teach  Christians  not  only  to  repudiate, 
but  to  denounce  the  special  "  Gospel "  of  the  Apostle 
of  the  Gentiles.  According  to  their  interpretation, 
St.  John,  the  Apostle  of  Love,  hurled  forth  against 
his  gr^arfe- fellow- Apostle  yet  fiercer  execration,  and, 
in  "  cries  of  passionate  hatred,"  described  him  as  a 
False  Apostle,  a  Balaam,  a  Jezebel,  the  founder  ot" 
the  Nicolaitans,  and  a  teacher  of  crime  and  heresy. 
They,  therefore,  regard  the  addresses  of  the  Apocalypse 
to  the  Seven  Churches  as  manifestoes  directed  by  a 
Judaist  against  the  very  Apostle  by  whose  heroic 
labours  those  Churches  had  been  founded."  The  false- 
hood of  this  hypothesis  has  long  been  demonstrated. 
It  only  furnishes  an  illustration  of  the  ease  with  which 
a  theory,  resting  on  a  narrow  basis  of  fact,  may  bo 
pushed  into  complete  extravagance.  That  St.  Paul 
and  St.  James  approached  the  great  truths  of  Christi- 

1  NP'i,  Raca.  2  Renan,  S>t.  Faul,  j).  367. 


82  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

anity  from  different  points  of  view ;  that  they  did  not 
adopt  the  same  phrases  in  describing  them ;  that  they 
differed  about  various  questions  of  theory  and  practice ; 
even  that  they  stood  at  the  head  of  parties  whose 
mutual  bitterness  they  would  have  been  the  first  to 
deplore — is  clear  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and 
still  more  clear  from  scattered  notices  in  the  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul.  But  it  is  quite  common  for  the  adherents 
of  great  thinkers  to  exaggerate  their  differences,  and 
fail  to  catch  their  spirit.  Whatever  may  have  been 
the  tone  of  the  Jerusalem  Pharisees  towards  Gentile 
Christians  who  paid  no  regard  to  the  ceremonial  Law, 
we  have  the  evidence  of  St.  Paul  himself,^  as  well 
as  of  public  records  of  the  Church,  that  between  him 
and  the  other  Apostles  there  reigned  a  spirit  of  mutual 
respect  and  mutual  concession.  The  view,  therefore, 
that  St.  James  was  trying,  in  the  approved  modern 
fashion,  to  "  write  down "  St.  Paul,  may  be  finally 
dismissed. 

(2.)  The  other  view,  which  has  recently  been  main- 
tained by  Bishop  Lightfoot,"  is  that  St.  James  is  not 
thinking  of  St.  Paul  in  any  way  ;  that  his  expressions 
have  no  reference  to  him  whatever ;  and  that  he  is 
only  occupied  with  controversies  which  moved  in  an 
entirely  different  world  of  ideas.  Now  it  is,  I  think, 
sufficiently  proved  that  this  view  is  possible.  Evidence 
has  been  adduced  to  show  that  the  question  of  faith  and 
works  was  one  which  had  been  long  and  eagerly  debated 
in  the  Jewish  Schools,  and  that  the  names  of  Abraham, 
and  even  of  Rahab,^  as  forming  two  marked  contrasts,  had 

1  Gal.  ii.  9;  Acts  xv.  13—21;  xxi.  17—25. 

'  Galatians,   pp.    152 — 162.     This   is  the  view  of   Schneckenburger, 
Thcile,  Ncauder,  Schaif,  Thcirsch,  Hofiiiaiiii.  Hutlior,  Langc,  Plumptre. 
^  That  Rahab  was  promiueut  iu  Jewish  thought  we  see  from  Matt.  i.  5. 


TRUST  IN  MONOTHEISM.  83 

constantly  been  introduced  into  these  discussions.  It 
is  not,  therefore,  true  to  say  that  St.  James  must  be 
thinkincr  of  St.  Paul.  The  "  solifidianism "  of  the 
Jews  consisted  in  an  exclusive  trust  in  their  Mono- 
theism, their  descent  from  Abraham,  their  circumci- 
sion, and  their  possession  of  the  Law.^  Justin  Martyr 
alludes  to  Jews  who,  "  although  they  were  sinners,  yet 
deceived  themselves  by  saying  that,  if  they  knew  God, 
He  would  not  impute  sin  to  them.""  If,  then,  the  early 
date  of  the  Epistle  could  be  otherwise  demonstrated,  the 
question  as  to  any  designed  opposition  between  the 
two  Apostles  would  fall  to  the  ground,  and  we  should 
only  have  to  show  whether  it  is  possible  to  reconcile 
independent  statements  which  at  first  appear  to  be 
mutually  exclusive.  It  is  so  important  to  establish  this 
fact — so  important  to  prove  that  whatever  be  the  date  of 
the  Epistle,  St.  James  may  be  refuting  the  notion  of  a 
justification  by  faith  which  is  not  that  described  by  St. 
Paul,  but  a  blind  Judaic  trust  in  privileges  and  obser- 
vances— that  it  will  be  worth  while  to  show  from  the 
Talmud  how  prevalent  these  views  were  in  the  Jewish 
world. 

a.  Thus,  as  regards  Monotheism,  we  find  that  in 
repeating  the  Shema,  or  daily  prayer,  "  Hear,  0  Israel, 
the  Lord  our  God  is  one  God  "  (Deut.  vi.  4) ;  "whoso- 
ever prolongs  the  utterance  of  the  word  One  {echad)  shall 
have  his  days  and  years  prolonged  to  him  "  (Berachoth, 
f.  13,  b). 

When  Akhiva  was  martyred  by  having  his  flesh  torn 
from  him,  he  died  uttering  this  word  "  One ;  "  and  then 
came  a  Bath  Kol,  which  said,  "  Blessed  art  thou,  Rabbi 

'  Matt.  iii.  9 ;  John  viii.  33  ;  Rom.  ii.  17 — 20,  and  compare  Jer.  vii.  4. 
2  Just.  Mart.  Dial.  §  141. 

^2 


84  THE    EARLY    DAYS  OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Akliiva,  for  thy  soul  and  the  word  One  left  thy  body 
together"  (id.  f.  61,  b). 

13.   Again,  as  regards  circumcision  : 

"  Though  Abraham  kept  all  the  commandments, 
including  the  whole  ceremonial  law  (Kiddashin,  f.  82,  a), 
btill  he  was  not  i^crfect  till  he  was  circumcised  "  (Xeda- 
rim,  f.  31,  h). 

"  So  great  is  circumcision,  that  thirteen  covenants 
were  made  concerning  it"  (Nedarim,  f.  81,  6). 

Many  Jews  relied  less  on  their  observances  than  on 
their  possession  of  special  privileges. 

7-  As  regards  their  national  position,  they  said  that 
God  had  given  to  Israel  three  precious  gifts — the  Law, 
the  land  of  Israel,  and  the  world  to  come  •}  that  all 
Israelites  were  princes,^  all  holy,^  all  philosophers,  "  full 
of  meritorious  works  as  a  pomegranate  of  pips,"  ^  and 
that  it  was  as  impossible  for  the  world  to  be  without 
them  as  to  be  without  air.^  They  even  ventured  to 
say  that  "  All  Israelites  have  a  portion  in  the  world  to 
come,  as  it  is  written,  And  thy  people  are  all  righteous, 
they  shall  inherit  the  land"  (Is.  Ix.  21).  (Sanhedrin, 
f.  90,  «.) 

"  The  world  was  created  only  for  Israel :  none  are 
called  the  children  of  God  but  Israel :  none  are  beloved 
before  God  but  Israel  "  (Gerim,  1). 

S.  In  fact,  on  the  testimony  of  the  Talmud  itself, 
externalism  had  triumphed  in  the  heart  of  the  Jewish 
Church.  The  High  Priests,  though  they  were,  accord- 
ing to  the  best  Jewisli  testimony,  shameful  examples 
of  greed,  simony,  luxury,  glutton^-,  pride,  and  violence, 
were  yet  quite  content  with   themselves  if  they  were 

'  Berachotli.  f.  5.  a.         '-  Shahbath,  f.  57,  a.        ^  Sliabbath,  £.  ^i^,  a. 
*  The  Machsor  for  Poutocost.  ^  Taauitli,  f.  3,  b. 


MECHANICAL  HOLINESS.  85 

rigorists  in  the  minutiae  of  Levitism  instead  of  ex- 
amples of  ideal  righteousness.  In  the  tract  Sota  (47,  h) 
there  is  a  bitter  complaint  that  moral  worth  was  dis- 
regarded, and  no  regard  paid  to  anything  but  external 
service.  In  another  tract  (Yoma,  23,  a)  we  are  told 
that  outward  observance  was  more  highly  esteemed 
than  inward  purity,  and  that  murder  itself  was  con- 
sidered venial  in  comparison  with  a  ceremonial  defile- 
ment of  the  Temple.^  St.  James  was  daily  familiar 
with  this  spectacle  of  men  who,  living  in  defiance  of 
every  moral  law,  yet  thought  to  win  salvation  by  the 
easy  mechanism  of  ceremonial  scrupulosity.  Against 
such  mechanical  conceptions  of  holiness  his  Epistle 
would  have  told  with  great  power. 

(3.)  But  believing  as  I  do,  on  other  grounds,  that 
the  Epistle  was  written  shortly  before  St.  James's 
death,  it  becomes  difficult  to  suppose  that  St.  James's 
argument  in  favour  of  "  justification  by  works  "  bears 
no  relation  lohatever  to  the  great  argumentative 
Epistles  in  which  St.  Paul  had  established  the  truth 
of  Justification  by  Eaith.  And  while  I  freely  concede 
that  the  question  of  faith  and  works  was  frequently 
discussed  in  the  Jewish  Schools,  and  with  special  re- 
ference to  the  life  of  Abraham,  there  is  not,  I  think, 
sufficient  evidence  that  the  doctrine  had  ever  been  so 
distinctly  formulated,  and  certainly  it  had  never  been 
so  fully  and  powerfully  discussed,  as  it  was  in  the 
Epistles  to  the  Romans  and  Galatians.^  If  we  are  right 
in   supposing  that   St.  James  wrote  his  Epistle  about 

^  For  the  various  Talmudic  quotations  see  Gratz,  iii.  321,  322,  and  tlie 
works  of  Scliottgcn,  Meuschen,  Eisenmonger,  Herslion,  Hamburgor,  &c. 
No  less  than  fourteen  of  the  Treatises  of  tlie  Talmud,  both  Mislnia  and 
Gemara,  have  now  been  translated  into  French  by  Mois(^  Schwab. 

2  "  Und  sicher  kann  man  nicht  leugnen  dass  die  Aom  Apostel  Paulus 


86  THE    EARLY    DAYS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

the  year  01  or  02,  then  some  years  had  elapsed  since 
St.  Paul  had  sent  forth  these  great  Epistles.  Con- 
sidering that  emissaries,  who  came  from  Jerusalem — 
who  came  ostensibly  from  James — who  boasted,  though 
not  always  truly,  of  his  sanction  and  authority — who 
carried  with  them  letters  which,  if  not  written  by  him, 
were  written  by  leading  personages  in  the  Church  of 
which  he  was  the  Bishop — had  penetrated  into  many 
of  the  communities  founded  by  St.  Paul,  and  had  half- 
undone  his  work  by  reducing  his  converts  to  the  legal 
bondage  from  which  he  had  set  them  free — it  becomes 
almost  inconceivable  that  St.  James,  even  if  he  had  not 
seen  copies  of  one  or  other  of  those  Epistles,  should  not 
at  least  have  been  familiar  with  the  general  drift  of 
views  which  had  become  notorious  wherever  the  name 
of  Christ  was  preached.  Now,  the  teaching  of  St. 
Paul  was  intensely  original.  It  was  not  easy  for 
any  one  to  grasp  its  fuU  meaning ;  and  it  was  quite 
impossible  for  any  hostile  and  prejudiced  person  to 
understand  it  at  all.  To  many,  educated  in  the 
absorbing  prejudices  of  Judaism,  his  opinions  about 
the  Law  would  have  appeared  dubious.  Their  indig- 
nation would  have  been  kindled  by  the  fiery  and  almost 
contemptuous  boldness  of  some  of  the  expressions  which 
he  wrote  and  published,  and  which  he  must  therefore 
have  frequently  let  fall  in  the  heat  of  controversy. 
In  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  it  is  hardly  likely  that 
the  dialectics  of  St.  Paul  were  lovingly  or  patiently 
studied.  St.  James  himself  is  our  witness  to  the  fact 
that  there,  and  throughout  the  Ghettos  of  the  world, 
the  views  of  the  great  missionary  were  systematically 

aufgestellbe  Lehi-e  iiber  dern  Glauben  zu  dieser  Abhaudlung  die  nachste 
Veranlassuug  gab"  (Ewald,  Die  Sendschreiben,  ii.  p.  198). 


HATRED   OF  ST.  PAUL.  87 

misrepresented.  To  the  ordinary  Jewish  Christian  he 
was  known  as  one  who  constantly  taught  "  apostasy 
from  Moses,''  as  one  who  "forbad''  not  only  Gentiles, 
but  "  all  Jews,"  to  circumcise  their  children,  and  "  to 
walk  according  to  the  customs."  ^  As  regards  Jews, 
the  charge  was  false.  St.  Paul  never  interfered  with 
them ;  and  since  he  himself  kept  the  general  provisions 
of  the  Law  as  a  national  duty — greatly  as,  to  him, 
they  must  have  lost  their  significance — we  have  every 
reason  to  suppose  that  he  would  have  advised  any  Jew 
who  consulted  him  to  do  the  same.  But  any  lie,  how- 
ever often  refuted,  is  good  enough  for  party-spirit ;  and 
no  amount  of  explanation,  however  simple  and  sincere, 
will  prevent  the  grossest  misrepresentations  of  opinion 
from  being  used  for  their  own  purposes  by  religious  par- 
tisans. Further  than  this,  it  is  not  only  possible,  but 
probable,  that  some  of  St.  Paul's  followers  did  misinter- 
pret his  characteristic  expressions,  did  make  a  bad  and 
even  dangerous  use  of  them.  We  might  easily  imagine 
that  this  would  be  the  case,  because  every  day  shows 
us  how  easy  it  is,  first  to  turn  any  expression  into  a 
watchcry,  then  to  empty  it  of  all  significance,  and 
finally  to  use  it  in  a  sense  entirely  alien  from  that  in 
which  it  was  originally  used.  Here  again  we  are  not 
left  to  conjecture.  We  have  the  express  testimony  of 
the  second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter  that  there  were  those 
who  wrested  the  difiicult  parts  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles, 
as  they  did  also  the  rest  of  the  Scriptures,  to  their  own 
perdition.  Now,  if  it  be  merely  snatched  up  as  a 
formula — without  an  earnest  desire  to  understand  it, 
without  the  thought  which  was  necessary  to  see  it  in  its 
proper  perspective — there  is  no  expression  more  liable 

^  Acts  xxi.  21. 


88  THE    EARLY    DAYS  OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

to  be  perverted  than  St.  Paul's  cliaracteristic  formula  of" 
"  Justification  by  Faith."  In  his  sense  of  the  words  it 
is  one  of  the  deepest  and  most  essential  trutlis  of  Chris- 
tianity ;  but  in  his  sense  only.  And  he  had  used  both 
words,  "Justification"  and  "Faith,"  in  meanings  which 
made  them  parts  of  one  great  system  of  thoughts.  It 
is  owing  to  this  that  his  words  have  been  constantly 
misunderstood,  and  are  to  this  day  deplorably  misinter- 
preted. To  this  day  there  are  some  who  use  expressions 
so  objectionable  as  "  works  are  deadly."  There  were  even 
in  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  as  there  have  been  since, 
Nicolaitans  and  other  Antinomians,  who,  on  the  claim 
of  possessing  faith,  have  set  themselves  in  superiority 
to  the  moral  law,  and  asserted  a  licence  to  commit 
all  ungodliness.  Now,  if  St.  James  had  come  across 
such  men,  or  had  been  told  of  their  existence,  or 
had  even  met  with  Jewish  Christians  who,  without 
understanding  St.  Paul's  teaching,  were  perplexed  by 
the  ignorant  repetition  of  the  formula  which  was 
selected  to  represent  it,  would  there  have  been  any- 
thing derogatory  to  the  character  of  St.  James,  or 
unworthy  of  his  position,  in  the  endeavour  to 
refute  the  perversions  to  which  this  formula  was 
liable  ?  Is  it  not  a  high  service  to  expose  the  empty 
use  of  any  expression  which  has  been  degraded  to  the 
purposes  of  cant  and  faction  ?  Would  not  St.  Paul 
have  rejoiced  that  such  a  task  should  have  been  per- 
formed ?  Would  he  not  have  performed  it  himself,  if 
circumstances  had  led  him  to  see  that  it  was  needful  ? 
It  is,  indeed,  improbable  that  he  would  in  that  case 
have  used  all  the  expressions  which  St.  James  has  used ; 
but  his  pastoral  Epistles  are  sufficient  to  prove  that  he 
would  have  cordially  concurred  with  him  in  his  general 


ST.   JAMES   AND   ST.   PAUL.  89 

opinion.  I  believe,  then,  with  many  of  the  Fathers, 
that  St.  James  wrote  this  passage  with  the  express 
intention  of  correcting  false  inferences  from  the  true 
teaching  of  St.  Paul;^  and  that,  though  there  is  no 
contradiction  between  them,  there  is  a  certain  antithesis 
— a  traceable  difference  in  the  types  of  dogma  which  they 
respectively  adopted.^ 

If  the  arguments  of  St.  James  had  been  intended 
for  a  refutation  of  St.  Paul  himself,  they  would  have 
been  singularly  ineffectual.  They  do  not  fathom  the 
depths  of  his  meaning  ;  they  deal  with  uses  of  his  words 
which  are  more  superficial  and  less  specifically  Christian. 
A  polemical  argument  must,  as  such,  be  a  failure  if 
every  word  which  the  writer  says  could  be  adopted  by 
the  person  against  whom  he  is  writing.  It  is  only  as 
the  correction  of  onesided  and  erroneous  inferences  from 
St.  Paul's  teaching,  drawn  by  honest  ignorance  or  cir- 
culated by  hostile  malice,  that  the  argument  of  St. 
James  has  a  value,  which  the  Church  of  all  ages  has 
rejoiced  to  recognise. 

But  setting  aside  the  question  of  conscious  opposition 
between  the  views  of  the  two  Apostles,  as  one  which  lies 
outside  the  range  of  proof,  we  have  to  ask  the  far  more 
important  question,  How  is  their  language  reconcilable 
with  the  truth  of  Grod  ?  How  can  it  be  said  with  equal 
confidence 

"  Ye  are  saved  through  faith  ....  7iot  of  icorks " 
(Eph.  ii.  8,  9),  and 

"  Ye  see  .  .  .  that  bi/  works  a  man  is  justified,  and 
not  hy  faith  only  "  (James  ii.  24)  ? 

And  here  I  must  entirely  differ  from  Luther  in  the 

'  This  is  the  view  adopted  by  Bp.  Bull  in  his  Harmonia  ApostoUca. 
^  So  Schmid,  Wiesinger,  Sec. 


90  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

view  that  the  two  statements,  in  the  senses  intended  by 
their  authors,  are  irreconcilable.^  The  reconciliation 
is  easy  when  we  see  that  St.  James  is  using  all  three 
words — Faith,  Works,  Justification — in  a  different  sense 
to  different  persons,  with  different  illustrations,  under 
different  circumstances  ;  and  when  we  find,  further,  that 
St.  James,  in  other  passages,  insists  no  less  than  St. 
Paul  on  the  importance  of  faith ;  and  St.  Paul,  no  less 
than  St.  James,  on  the  necessity  of  works. 

i.  For  by  Faith  St.  Paul  never  means  dead  faith 
{fides  informis)  at  all.  He  means,  (1)  in  the  lowest  sense 
of  the  word,  general  trust  in  God  {assensus,  fiducia)  -^ 
then  (2)  self-surrender  to  God's  will ;  ^  (3)  in  its 
highest,  and  most  Pauline  sense — the  sense  in  which  he 
uses  it  when  he  speaks  of  "  Justification  bj'-  Faith  " — it 
is  self-surrender  which  has  deepened  into  sanctification  ; 
it  is  a  living  power  of  good  in  every  phase  of  life ;  it  is 
unio  mystica,  a  mystical  incorporation  with  Christ  in 
unity  of  love  and  life.*  But  this  application  of  the 
word  was  peculiar  to  St.  Paul,  and  St.  James  does 
not  adopt  it.  He  meant  by  faith  in  tins  passage 
a  mere  theoretical  belief — belief  which  may  exist 
without  any  germinant  life — belief  which  may  stop 
short  at  a  verbal  profession  of  Jewish  orthodoxy — belief 

'  Lutlier  says :  "  Plures  sudarunt  in  Epistola  Jacobi  ut  ciirn  Paulo 
concordarent  .  .  .  sed  minus  feliciter,  sunt  enim  contraria,  '  fides 
justificat '  '  fides  non  justificat ' — qui  haec  rite  conjungero  potest,  huic 
vitam  meam  imponam,  ct  fatuum  me  nominare  permittam "  {Colloq. 
ii.  202).  Strobel,  in  a  review  of  Wiesinger,  says,  "No  matter  in  what 
sense  wo  take  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  it  is  always  in  conflict  with  the 
remaining  parts  of  Holy  Writ." 

-  Rom.  iv.  18 ;  as  in  Heb.  xii.  1. 

3  Rom.  X.  9 ;  Pliil.  iii.  7. 

*  Rom.  xii.  5  ;  Phil.  i.  21 ;  1  Cor.  vi.  17.  See  Life  and  Work  of  St. 
Paul,  ii.  188 — 193;  Pfleiderer,  Pauliniamus,  §  5;  Baur,  Paul.  ii.  119; 
Neue  Test.  Theol.  I  176. 


WORKS  AND   JUSTIFICATION.  91 

which  does  not  even  go  so  far  as  that  of  demons — 
belief  which,  taken  alone,  is  so  inappreciable  in  value 
that  he  compares  it  to  a  charity  which  speaks  words  of 
idle  comfort  and  does  not  give.^ 

ii.  Again,  by  Works  the  two  writers  meant  very 
different  things.  St.  Paul  was  thinking  mainly  of  those 
works  which  stood  high  in  the  estimation  of  his  Jewish 
opponents  ;  he  meant  the  works  and  observances  of  the 
Levitical  and  ceremonial  Law — new  moons,  sabbaths, 
sacrifices,  ablutions,  meats,  drinks,  phylacteries,  and  so 
forth ; — or,  at  the  very  highest,  works  of  ordinary  duty, 
"deeds  of  the  Law,"  untouched  by  emotion,  not 
springing  from  love  to  God.  He  did  not  mean,  as  St. 
James  did,  works  of  love  and  goodness  done  in  obedience 
to  the  royal  law,^  those  works  which  spring  from  a  true 
and  lively  faith,  which  7)iust  spring  from  it,  which  it  is 
as  impossible  to  sever  from  it  as  it  is  to  sever  from  fire 
its  light  and  heat.^ 

iii.  And,  finally,  the  sense  of  the  word  JuMification 
in  St.  Paul  moves  in  a  higher  plane  than  that  in  which 
it  is  used  by  St.  James.  St.  Paul  uses  the  word  in  a 
special,  a  technical,  a  theological  sense,  to  express  the 
righteousness  of  Grod,  which,  by  a  judgment  of  acquittal, 
pronounced  once  for  all  in  the  expiatory  death  of  Christ, 
He  imputes  to  guilty  man.  St.  James  uses  the  word  in 
the  much  simpler  sense  of  our  being  declared  and  shown 
to  be  righteous — not  indeed,  as  many  have  said,  before 

*  In  other  passages  "  faith  "  connotes  somewhat  more  than  this,  namely, 
trust  iu  God  (i.  5  ;  v.  15). 

2  Ja.  i.  25 ;  ii.  12. 

^  If  St.  Paul  attaches  to  "  works  "  a  lower  meaning  than  St.  James, 
St.  James  attaches  to  "  faith  "  a  lower  meaning  than  St.  Paul ;  but  there 
can  be  no  confusion  about  the  results,  because  each  writer  uses  the  words 
in  senses  which  he  makes  perfectly  clear. 


92  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

men  only^ — but  righteous  before  God,  as  those  whose  life 
is  in  accordance  with  their  belief.'  St.  Paul  speaks  of  the 
justification  which  begins  for  the  sinner  by  the  trustful 
acceptance  of  his  reconciliation  to  God  in  Christ,  and 
which  attains  its  perfect  stage  when  the  believer  is 
indeed  "  in  Christ " — when  Christ  has  become  to  him  a 
new  nature  and  a  quickening  spirit.  St.  James  speaks 
of  the  justification  of  the  believer  by  his  producing  such 
works  as  are  the  sole  possible  demonstration  of  the 
vitality  of  his  indwelling  faith.^ 

Briefly,  then,  it  may  be  said  that  the  works  which 
St.  Paul  thinks  of  are  the  works  of  the  Law,  those  of 
St.  James  the  works  of  godliness ;  that  St.  Paul  speaks 
of  deep  and  mystic  faith,  St.  James  of  theoretic  belief ; 
that  St.  Paul  has  in  view  the  initial  justification  of  a 
sinner,  St.  James  the  complete  justification  of  a  believer.* 

iv.  In    accordance   with   this  view,   although   both 

^  This  common  explanation  (^Calvin,  Grotius,  Baiimgarten,  &c.)  is  quite 
untenable.  There  is  not  a  word  in  St.  James  to  indicate  that  he  is  only 
thinking  of  justification  before  men ;  and  the  notion  that  he  is,  is  refuted 
by  ver.  14. 

*  As  our  Lord  also  said,  "  By  thy  words  thou  shalt  be  justified '' 
(Matt.  xii.  37);  and  St.  Paul  himself,  in  Rom.  ii.  13,  "the  doers  of 
the  law  shall  he  justified."  Had  this  sentence  occurred  in  St.  James,  how 
eagerly  would  it  have  been  seized  upon  as  a  flat  contradiction  of  Rom. 
iii.  20,  "  Therefore,  from  the  works  of  the  law  shall  no  flesh  be  justified 
before  Him."  But  if  the  same  author  can  thus  in  the  .same  Epistle  use 
the  same  word  in  different  senses,  what  difficulty  can  there  be  in  sup- 
posing that  this  may  be  done  by  different  writers,  without  any  hostile 
intention  ? 

3  "  To  justify"  (SiKatovv  pis)  has  in  the  Bible  two  meanings:  (1)  "To 
pronounce  the  innocent  righteous  in  accordance  with  his  innocence " 
(Ex.  xxiii.  7;  Prov.  xvii.  15;  Is.  v.  23;  Matt.  xii.  37,  &c.);  (2)  to  make 
righteous,  or  lead  to  righteousness  (Dan.  xii.  31;  Is.  liii.  11;  and  Rom. 
passim).  In  St.  James  true  faith  is  imputed  as  righteousness,  but  justifi- 
••ation  follows  works  as  the  proof  of  true  faitli  (Lange). 

*  "  Works,"  says  Luther,  "  do  not  make  us  righteous,  but  cause  us  to 
be  declared  righteous  "  (Luke  xvii.  9,  10). 


THE  FAITH  OF  ABRAHAM.  93 

Apostles  refer,  for  illustration  of  their  views,  to  the  life 
of  the  Patriarch  who  lived  so  many  centuries  before  the 
dehvery  of  the  Law,  they  do  not  refer  to  the  same 
events  in  his  life.  St.  Paul  illustrates  his  position  by 
Abraham's  belief  in  Grod's  promise  that  he  should  have 
a  son,  when  against  hope  he  believed  in  hope.^  St. 
James,  taking  the  life  and  the  faith  of  Abraham,  so  to 
speak,  "much  lower  down  the  stream,"  shows  how 
Abraham,  many  years  afterwards,  was  justified  as  a 
believer,  justified  by  works,  when  he  gave  the  crowning 
proof  of  his  obedience  by  the  willingness  to  slay  even 
his  only  son  and  the  heir  of  the  promise.^  It  is  obviously 
as  true  to  say  that  Abraham  in  that  act  was  (in  the 
ordinary  meaning  of  the  words)  justified  by  faith,  as  that 
he  was  justified  by  works.  He  was  justified  by  faith, 
because  nothing  but  his  faith  could  have  led  him  to 
such  perfect  endurance  in  the  hour  of  trial ;  he  was  jus- 
tified by  works,  because,  without  his  works,  there  could 
have  been  no  proof  that  his  faith  existed,  Paith  and 
works,  in  this  sense,  are,  in  fact,  inseparably  intertwined. 
There  cannot  be  such  works  without  faith  ;  there  cannot 
be  such  faith   without   works.     It  is  really  the  same 

1  Rom.  iv.  3,  9,  22;  Gen.  xv.  6. 

2  James  ii.  23 ;  Gen.  xxii.  12.  See  Hutliei-  ad,  loc.  A  remarkable 
Talmudic  story  tells  us  that  Satan  slandered  Abraham  before  God,  saying 
that  God  had  given  him  a  son  when  lie  was  a  hundred  years  old,  and  he 
had  not  even  spared  a  dove  for  sacrifice.  God  answers  that  Abraham 
would  not  spare  even  his  sou  if  required.  So  God  said,  "  Take  now  thy 
son"  {as  if  a  king  should  say  to  his  bravest  warrior,  Fight  now  this 
hardest  battle  of  all),  "  for  fear  it  should  be  said  that  thy  former  trials 
were  easy."  "  I  have  two  sons,"  answered  Abraham.  "  Take  thine  onlg 
son."  "Each,"  he  answered,  "is  the  only  son  of  his  mother."  "Take 
him  whom  thou  lovest."  "I  love  them  both."  Then  God  said,  "Take 
Isaac."  Abraham  obeyed,  and  on  the  way  Satan  met  him,  and  tried  to 
make  him  murmur.  Abraham  answered,  "  I  will  walk  in  mine  integrity^' 
(Sanhedrin,  f.  89,  b). 


94  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

thing  to  say  that  a  man  is  (in  one  or  other  of  the 
senses  of  the  word)  justified  by  such  a  faith  as  must 
from  its  very  nature  issue  in  good  works,  or  by  such 
works  as  can  only  issue  from  a  true  and  lively  faith. 
Nor  is  it  surprising  (as  we  have  seen)  that  the 
question  should  be  illustrated  by  the  example  of 
Abraham,  whose  life  and  faith  were  constantly  discussed 
in  their  minutest  particulars  by  the  Jewish  Rabbis,  and 
who  was  asserted  to  have  not  only  been  saved  by  faith, 
but  to  have  observed  even  the  oral  commandments 
centuries  before  they  were  delivered.^  If  St.  James 
also  takes  the  instance  of  Rahab,  this  does  not  involve 
a  necessary  reference  to  the  remark  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  that  she,  too,  was  saved  by  faith.  For  the 
example  of  Rahab  was  also  greatly  discussed  in  the 
Jewish  schools,  and  for  her  faith  and  works  it  was  said 
that  no  less  than  eight  prophets,  who  were  also  priests, 
had  sprung  from  her,  and  that  Huldali,  the  prophetess, 
was  one  of  her  descendants,^ 

V.  And  the  superficial  contradiction  between  the 
Apostles  vanishes  to  nothing  when  we  bear  in  mind 
that  St.  Paul  is  dealing  with  the  vain  confidence 
of  legalism,  St.  James  with  the  vain  confidence  of 
orthodoxy,  St,  Paul  was  writing  to  Grentile  Churches 
to  prevent  them  from  being  seduced  into  trusting 
for  salvation  to  the  adoption  of  external  badges 
and  ceremonials,  or  to  good  deeds  done  in  a  spirit 
of  servile  fear.  St.  James  is  arguing  either  with 
Jewish  bigots  who  thought  that  a  profession  of 
Monotheism  and  a  participation  in  Jewish  privileges^ 
would  save  them ;  or  Avith  mistaken  Paulinists  who  had 

>  Toma,  f .  28.  b ;  Kiddushin,  f.  82,  a. 

2  Meggillah,  f.  U,  b.  s  Matt.  iii.  9. 


ST.   JAMES  ON  FAITH.  95 

snatched  up  a  formula  whicli  they  did  not  under- 
stand, and  who  thought  that  justification  could  be 
severed  from  sanctification — that  a  saving  faith  was 
possible  without  the  holiness  of  an  accordant  life.  St. 
Paul  is  contrasting  faith  in  Christ  with  works  of  the 
Law ;  St.  James  is  contrasting  a  dead  unreal  faith  with 
a  faith  which  evidences  its  reality  by  holy  works.  St. 
Paul's  arguments  were  meant  to  overthrow  the  vain  con- 
fidence of  the  Pharisee^;  St.  James's  tell  equally 
against  the  Jew  who  pillowed  his  hopes  on  fruitless 
orthodoxy,  and  the  Antinomian  who  identified  saving 
faith  with  barren  profession. 

For,  lastly,  there  is  no  difficulty  in  showing  that 
both  as  regards  faith  and  works  the  Apostles,  however 
much  their  expressions  may  differ,  were  substantially 
at  one. 

(i.)  Thus  as  regards  Faith,  St.  James  says  in  this 
very  chapter  : — 

"  And  the  Scripture  was  fulfilled  which  saith  And 
Abraham  Relieved  God,  and  it  was  reckoned  to  him  for 
righteousness'''^  (ii.   23). 

And  St.  Paul  quotes  the  same  verse  in  the  same 
words  (Eom.  iv.  3),  Avith  the  introduction  "What 
saith  the  Scripture  ?  " 

So  little  does  St.  James  exclude  faith,  that  he  speaks 
of  "  the  testing  of  faith "  as  working  out  that  "  en- 
durance "  which  is  the  appointed  path  of  perfection- 
ment   (i.   3)  ;  he  urges  the    duty  of  prayer  offered  in 

^  Comp.  Acts  xiii.  39. 

2  "Magnum  opus  sed  ex  Fide"  (Aug.  on  Ps.  xxxi.).  Ewald  briefly 
says,  "  Faith  is  tlie  first  and  most  necessary  thing;  this  is  here  also  taken 
for  granted  throughout ;  but  it  must  prove  its  existence  by  corresponding 
works,  otherwise  man  cannot  obtain  Divine  justification  and  final  re- 
demption "  (Die  Sendschreihen,  ii.  199). 


96  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

unwavering  faith  as  the  means  of  obtaining  Di^dne 
wisdom  (i.  6)  ;  he  describes  Christianity  as  being  the 
"  holding  the  faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  the  Lord  of 
the  Glory"  (ii.  1) ;  he  speaks  of  the  jDoor  as  being  heirs 
of  the  Kingdom  because  they  are  rich  in  faith  (ii.  5) ; 
he  implies  the  absolute  necessity  of  faith  co-existing 
with  works — working  with  them,  receiving  its  per- 
fection from  them  (ii.  22,  2G),  and  does  not  imagine  the 
possibility  of  such  works  as  he  contemplates  except  as 
the  visible  proofs  of  an  invisible  faith. 

(ii.)  And  exactly  as  St.  James  neither  ignores  nor 
underestimates  faith,  so  neither  does  St.  Paul  ignore 
nor  underestimate  the  value  and  necessity  of  good 
Works.  He  speaks  of  God  as  "  being  able  to  make 
all  joy  abound  in  us,  that  having  in  all  things  always 
all  sufficiency  [avrapKetav)  we  may  abound  unto  every 
good  work"  (2  Cor.  ix.  8).  He  speaks  of  good  works 
as  the  appointed  path  in  which  we  are  predestined  to 
walk  (Eph.  ii.  10).  He  describes  the  walking  "in 
every  good  work,  bearing  fruit,"  as  being  the  worthy 
walk,  and  the  walk  which  pleases  God  (Col.  i.  10).  He 
prays  that  the  Lord  Jesus  may  stablish  the  hearts  of 
His  converts  in  every  good  word  and  work  (2  Thess. 
ii.  17).  He  devotes  a  practical  section  in  every  Epistle 
to  the  inculcation  of  Christian  duties  and  virtues  (Eom. 
xii. — xvi. ;  1  Cor.  xvi.  ;  2  Cor.  ix. ;  Gal.  v.  G  ;  Eph. 
v.,  vi.  ;  Phil.  iv.  j  Col.  iii.,  iv.,  &c.).  He  devotes  the 
almost  exclusive  exhortations  of  his  very  latest  Epistles 
to  impress  on  all  classes  of  his  converts  the  blessedness 
of  faithful  working  (1  Tim.  ii.  10,  v.  10,  vi.  IS;  2  Tim. 
iii.  17  ;  Tit.  ii.  7 — 14,  iii.  8).  Nay,  more,  in  the  very 
Epistle  of  which  the  central  idea  is  Justification  by 
Faith,  he  does  not  scruple  to  use  the  word  justification 


AGREEMENT   OF  ST.   PAUL   AND   ST.   JAMES.  97 

in  the  less  specific  sense  of  St.  James,  and  to  write 
that  ''the  doers  of  the  Law  shall  be  JHstified"^ — a  sen- 
tence which  St.  James  might  have  adopted  as  his 
text.  Both  Apostles  would  have  freely  conceded  that 
(in  a  certain  sense)  faith  without  works  is  mere  ortho- 
doxy, and  works  without  faith  mere  legal  righteous- 
ness. 

Surely  after  these  proofs  that  for  all  practical  pur- 
poses the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  and  the  Bishop  of 
the  Circumcised  are  fundamentally  at  one — that  they 
agree  in  thought,  though  they  differ  in  expression,  or 
at  least  that  their  minor  differences  are  merged  in  a 
higher  unity — it  is  unjustifiable  to  speak  as  though,  on 
this  subject  at  any  rate,  there  was  any  bitter  contro- 
versy between  them.  They  approached  the  truths  of 
Christianity  from  different  sides ;  they  looked  at  them 
under  different  aspects ;  they  lived  amid  different 
surroundings ;  they  were  arguing  against  different 
errors;  they  used  different  phraseology.  The  anti- 
thesis between  them  only  lies  in  regions  of  literary 
expression ;  it  in  no  way  affects  the  duty  or  the  theory 
of  the  Christian  life.  There  is  not  a  word  which  St. 
Paul  wrote  on  these  topics  which  would  not  have  been 
accepted  after  a  little  explanation  by  St.  James,  though 
he  might  have  preferred  to  alter  some  of  the  expressions 
which  St.  Paul  employed.  There  is  not  a  word  which 
St.  James  wrote  on  them  which — when  explained  in 
St.  James's  sense —  St.  Paul  would  not  have  endorsed. 
It  is  true,  as  St.  Paul  wrote,  that  we  are  "justified  by 
faith  "  ;  it  is  true,  as  St.  James  wrote,  that  "  we  cannot 
be  justified  without  works."  Amid  the  seeming  verbal 
contradictions  there  is  a  real  agreement.    Both  Apostles 

1  Rom.  ii.  13. 

h 


98  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

held  identical  views  respecting  the  will  of  God,  the 
regeneration  of  man,  and  the  destiny  of  the  redeemed.^ 
The  ideal  which  each  accepted  was  so  nearly  the  same, 
that  St.  James's  brief  sketch  of  the  Wisdom  from  above 
might  be  hung  as  a  beautiful  companion  picture  to  St. 
Paul's  glorious  description  of  Heavenly  charity.  Both 
would  have  agreed,  heart  and  soul,  in  the  simple  and 
awful  moral  truth  of  such  passages  as  these  : — 

"  So  speak  and  so  do  as  they  who  shall  be  judged 
by  the  law  of  liberty."     (Ja.  ii.  12.) 

"  Faith  apart  from  works  is  dead,  by  itself."  (Ja. 
ii.  17,  2C.) 

"  The  work  of  each  shall  become  manifest,  for  the 
day  shall  reveal  it."     (1  Cor.  iii.  13.) 

"  God  shall  give  to  each  according  to  his  works." 
(Rom.  ii.  6—10.) 

"  We  must  all  be  made  manifest  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  Christ  that  each  may  obtain  the  things 
done  by  the  instrumentalit}'^  of  the  body,  with  reference 
to  the  things  he  did,  whether  good,  or  evil."  (2  Cor. 
V.  10.) 

Both,  again,  would  have  accepted  heart  and  soul 
such  language  as  that  of  St.  John,  in  which  these 
superficial  discrepancies  are  finally  reconciled — "  If  we 
say  that  we  have  fellowship  with  Him  and  walk  in 
darkness,  we  lie,  and  do  not  the  truth  "  (1  John  i.  6) ; 
— or  as  that  of  St.  Paul  himself  in  the  very  Epistle  in 
which  he  first  worked  out  the  sketch  of  his  great 
scheme,  and  in  the  three  different  conclusions  to  his 
own  favourite  and  thrice-repeated  formula  : — 

"  For  in  Christ  Jesus  neither  circumcision  availeth 
anything  nor  uncircumcision," — 

■  See  supra,  pp.  40,  48,  the  uote  ou  Jas.  i.  18. 


FAITH  AND   WORKS.  99 

But,  "  Faith  working  effectually  by  means  of  love." 
(Gal.  V.  6.) 

But,  "A  new  creature."     (Gal.  vi.  15.) 

But,  "  An  observance  of  the  commandments  of  God." 
(1  Cor.  vii.  19.) 

Had  St.  Paul  written,  as  Luther  wrote  for  him,  that 
man  is  justified  "by  Faith  o/^/y  "—had  he  been  in  this 
sense  a  Solifidian— then  there  would  have  been  a  more 
apparent  contradiction  between  him  and  St.  James. 
But  what  St.  Paul  said  was,  "  Therefore  we  reckon 
that  a  man  is  justified  b?/  faith,  apart  from  the  works 
of  the  Law "  (Rom.  iii.  28),  and  it  was  Luther 
who  ventured  to  interpolate  the  word  "  alone  " — the 
"  word  alone  I'  as  Erasmus  calls  it — "  stoned  with  so 
many  shoutings  " — ("  Vox  sola  tot  clamoribus  lapidata  "). 
In  St.  James's  sense  of  faith  this  would  have  indeed 
been  open  to  the  contradiction  (ii.  24)  "  Not  by  faith 
alone"  (ou/c  e'/c  77 iVretw? /ioi/oi;).  But  even  had  St.  Paul 
used  the  word  "  alone "  he  would  have  said  what  is 
true  in  Ids  sense  of  the  words,  and  in  the  sense  in 
which  they  are  adopted  in  the  Articles  of  our  Church. 
His  words  only  become  untrue  when  they  are  transferred 
into  the  different  senses  in  which  they  are  used  by  his 
brother  Apostle.^ 

In  this,  as  in  so  many  other  cases,  we  may  thank 
God  that  the  truth  has  been  revealed  to  us  under  many 
lights ;  and  that,  by  a  diversity  of  gifts,  the  Spirit 
ministered  to  each  Apostle  severally  as  He  would, 
inspiring  the  one  to  deepen  our  spiritual  life  by  the 
solemn  truth  that  Works  cannot  justify  apart  from 
Faith ;  and  the  other  to  stimulate  our  efforts  after  a 
holy  life  by  the  no  less  solemn  truth  that  Faith  cannot 

'  See  Article  IX.,  and  on  it  Bishop  Forbes,  Bishop  Harold  Browne,  &c. 

h  2 


100  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

justify  us  unless  it  be  the  living  faith  which  is  shown 
by  Works.  There  is,  in  the  diversity,  a  deeper  unity. 
The  Church,  thank  God,  is  "  Circumamicta  varie- 
tatibiis  " — clothed  in  raiment  of  many  hues.  St.  Paul 
had  dwelt  prominently  on  Faith ;  St.  Peter  dwells 
much  on  Hope  ;  St.  John  insists  most  of  all  on  Love. 
But  the  Christian  life  is  the  synthesis  of  these  Divine 
graces,  and  the  Works  of  which  St.  James  so  vehemently 
impresses  the  necessity,  are  works  which  are  the  com- 
bined result  of  operative  faith,  of  constraining  love,  and 
of  purifying  hope.^ 

'  See  au  excellent  tract  on  St.  Paul  and  St.  James  by  Dean  Bagot. 


THE   EARLIER  LIFE  AND   WORKS   OF   ST.  JOHN. 


250011   IT, 

THE  EARLIER  LIFE  AND  WORKS  OF  ST    JOHN. 


CHAPTEE  XXIY. 

ST.    JOHN. 

"  For  life,  with  all  it  yields  of  joy  and  woe, 
And  hope  and  fear — believe  the  aged  friend — 
Is  just  onr  chance  of  the  prize  of  learning  love, 
How  love  might  be,  hath  been  indeed,  and  is." — 

Browning,  A  Death  in  the  Desert. 

"  And  recognising  the  grace  given  to  me,  James,  and 
Kephas,  and  Jo/m,  who  are  thought  to  be  pillars,  gave 
to  me  and  Barnabas  the  right  hand  of  fellowship,  that 
we  to  the  Gentiles,  but  they  to  the  circumcision"^ — 

So  wrote  St.  Paul  to  the  Galatians,  in  one  of  the 
passages  of  the  New  Testament,  which — apart  from  the 
Gospels — has  a  deeper  personal  interest,  and  which 
throws  more  light  on  the  condition  of  the  Church 
in  the  days  of  the  Apostles  than  any  other."  It  is  an 
inestimable  privilege  to  the  Church  that  we  possess 
writings  of  each  of  these  three  Pillar- Apostles — as  well 
as  of  that  untimely-born  Apostle  on  whose  daring 
originality  they  were  inclined  to  look  with  alarm,  until 
he  had  fully  set  forth  to  them  that  view  of  the  Gospel 
which  was  emphatically  "Ms  Gospel,"^  and  which  he 
had  learnt  "  neither  from  men  nor  by  the  instrumen- 

1  Gal.  ii.  9.  ^  Gal.  i.  11— ii.  21. 

^  "  My  Gospel,"  1  Cor.  xi.  23.     rh  evayyeXiou  u  K7)pvffffu  (Gal.  ii.  2). 


104  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

tality  of  man."^  We  are  thus  enabled  to  see  the  Gospel 
in  the  fourfold  aspect  in  which  it  appeared  to  four  men, 
— each  specially  enlightened  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  but 
each  limited  by  individual  conditions,  because  each 
received  the  treasure  in  earthen  vessels.  The  minds  of" 
men  inevitably  differ.  The  individuality  of  each 
man — his  subjectivity — his  capacity  to  receive  truth 
— his  power  of  expressing  it — all  differ.  Hence  the 
truths  which  he  utters,  since  they  are  uttered  in 
human  language,  must  be  more  or  less  differentiated  by 
human  peculiarities,  and  hence  arises  a  gracious  and 
fruitful  variety,  not  a  perplexing  contradiction.  Had 
the  Apostles  been  bad  men,  had  there  been  in  their 
hearts  the  least  tinge  of  spiritual  or  moral  falsity,  the 
pure  stream  of  truth  would  have  been  corrupted  by  evil 
admixtures ;  but  since  they  were  sincere  and  noble 
men,  the  individuality  with  which  the  style  and 
method  of  each  is  stamped  so  far  from  being  a  loss  to 
us  is  a  peculiar  gain.  No  one  man,  unless  his  powers 
had  been  dilated  almost  to  infinitude,  would  have  been 
able  to  set  forth  to  myriads  of  different  souls  the  perfec- 
tion of  many-sided  truths.  It  was  a  blessed  ordinance 
of  God  which  enables  us  to  hear  the  words  of  revelation 
spoken  by  so  many  noble  voices  in  so  many  differing 
tones. 

We  see  from  St.  Paul's  allusion,  that  twenty  years 
after  the  Resurrection^  the  three  Pillar- Apostles,  at  the 
date  of  his  conference  with  them,  were  at  Jerusalem, 
and  were  still  regarded  as  the  chief  representatives  of 
Jewish  Christianity.  But  their  Judaic  sympathies 
were  felt  in  very  different  degrees.     St.  James  repre- 

*   Gal.  i.  1,  ovK  air'  avOpiiirwv  ovhf  hi   dvdpwirov,  1  Cor.  xi.  23  ;   XV.  3. 
2  About  A.D.  .52. 


THE  PILLAR-APOSTLES.  105 

sents  Christianity  on  its  most  Judaic  side — spiritualising 
its  morals,  but  assuming  rather  than  expounding  its 
most  specific  truths.  He  wrote  exactly  as  we  should 
have  expected  a  man  to  write  who  was  a  Nazarite, 
a  late  convert,  a  Bishop  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem,  a 
daily  frequenter  of  the  Temple,  a  man  in  the  highest 
repute  among  the  Jews  themselves,  a  man  who,  for 
more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century,  lived  in  the  focus  of 
the  most  powerful  Judaic  influences.  He  was  the  ac- 
knowledged leader  of  those  converts  who  were  least 
willing  to  break  loose  from  the  Levitic  law  and  the 
tradition  of  the  fathers.  St.  Peter,  on  the  other  hand, 
became  less  and  less  a  representative  of  the  narrower 
phase  of  Judaic  Christianity — more  and  more,  as  life 
advanced,  the  Apostle  of  Catholicity.  The  vein  of 
timidity  which,  in  his  natural  temperament,  was  so 
strangely  mixed  with  courage — the  plasticity  which  gave 
to  his  conduct  a  Judaic  colouring  so  long  as  he  was 
surrounded  by  the  elders  at  Jerusalem,  or  by  emissaries 
who  came  from  James  to  Antioch — caused  him  to  be 
long  regarded  by  the  converted  Jews  (undoubtedly 
against  his  will)  as  a  party  leader.  Yet  he  was  among 
the  earliest  to  see  the  universality  of  the  Gospel  mes- 
sage, and  he  flung  himself  with  ardour  into  the  sup- 
port of  St.  Paul's  effort  to  emancipate  the  Gentiles 
from  Levitic  observances.  And  when  he  begran  his 
missionary  journeys,  his  thoughts  widened  more  and 
more  until,  as  we  find  from  his  Epistle,  he  was  enabled 
to  accept  unreservedly  the  teachings  of  St.  Paul,  while 
he  divests  them  of  their  antithetical  character,  and 
avoids  their  more  controversial  formulae.  When  we 
combine  the  teaching  of  St.  James  and  St.  Paul,  we 
find  those  contrasted  yet  complementary  truths  which 


106  THE   EARLY  DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

were  necessary  to  the  full  apprehension  of  the  Catholic 
Faith  in  its  manifold  applicability  to  human  needs. 
St.  Peter  occupies  an  intermediate  and  conciliatory 
position  between  these  two  extremes — more  progressive 
than  St.  James,  less  daringly  original  and  independent 
than  St.  Paul.  But  to  utter  the  final  word  of  Chris- 
tian revelation — to  drop,  as  it  were,  the  great  keystone, 
which  was  still  needed  to  complete  and  compact  the 
wide  arch  of  Truth — was  reserved  as  the  special  glory 
of  the  Beloved  Disciple.  And  this  was  the  crowning 
work  of  that  old  age  which,  as  a  peculiar  blessing  to 
the  Church  of  Christ,  was  probably  prolonged  to  witness 
the  dawn  of  the  second  century  of  the  Christian  Church.^ 

But  in  St.  John  too  we  see  that  growth  of  spiritual 
enlightenment  which  made  his  life  an  unbroken  educa- 
tion. In  his  latest  writings  we  find  a  deeper  insight 
into  the  truth  than  it  would  have  been  possible  for  him 
to  attain  before  Grod  had  "  shown  him  all  things  in  the 
slow  history  of  their  ripening."  The  "Son  of  Thunder" 
of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  had  the  lessons  of  many  years 
to  learn  before  he  could  become  the  St.  John  who  in 
Patmos  saw  the  Apocalypse.  The  St.  John  who  saw 
the  Apocalypse  had  still  the  lessons  of  many  years  to 
learn,  and  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  to  witness,  before  he 
could  gaze  on  the  world  from  the  snowy  summit  of 
ninety  winters,  and  become  the  Evangelist  of  the 
fourth  Gospel,  the  Apostle  of  Christian  Love. 

And  yet  the  days  of  St.  John  were  not  divided  from 
each  other  by  any  overpowering  crisis,  but  were,  from 
first  to  last, 

"  Bound  each  to  each  by  natural  piety." 

'  Qui  in  secrcta  divinae  se  nativitatis  immergeus  ausus  est  dicere  quod 
cuncta  saecula  nescicbant,  "  In  principio  erat  vorbuin  "  (Jer.  in  Isa.  Ivi.  4. 


ST.   JOHN.  107 

In  the  life  of  St.  Paul  the  vision  on  the  road  to  Damascus 
had  cleft  a  deep  chasm  between  his  earlier  and  later 
years.  The  character  of  the  Apostle  retained  the  same 
elements,  but  his  opinions  were  suddenly  revolutionised. 
Paul  the  Apostle  could  only  look  back  with  an  agony 
of  remorse  on  the  thoug^hts  and  deeds  of  Saul  the  In- 
quisitor.  Like  Augustine  and  Luther,  he  is  a  type  of 
the  ardent  natures  which  are  brought  to  Grod  and  to  the 
service  of  the  truth  by  a  spasm  of  sudden  change.  But 
St.  John  was  one  of  those  pure  saints  of  whom  the 
grace  of  Grod  takes  early  hold,  and  in  whose  life,  as  in 
those  of  Thomas  a  Kempis  and  Melancthon,  "  reason  and 
religion  run  together  like  warp  and  woof  to  weave  the 
web  of  a  holy  life."  To  him,  from  earliest  days,  the 
words  of  the  poet  are  beautifully  applicable — 

"  There  are  who  ask  not  if  thine  eye 

Be  on  them  ;  who,  in  love  and  truth, 
Where  no  misgiving  is,  rely 

Upon  the  genial  sense  of  youth  : 
Glad  hearts  !  without  reproach  or  blot, 
Who  do  thy  work,  and  know  it  not  ; 
Oh,  if  through  confidence  misplaced 

They  fail,  thy  saving  arm,  dread  Power  !  around 
them  cast." 

Never,  perhaps,  was  a  more  glorious  destiny  reserved 
for  any  man,  or  a  destiny  more  unlike  what  he  could 
have  conceived  possible,  than  that  which  was  awaiting 
the  Apostle,  when  he  played  as  a  boy  beside  his  father's 
boat  on  the  bright  strip  of  sand  which  still  marks  the 
site  of  Bethsaida.  His  father  was  Zabdia  or  Zebedee, 
of  whom  we  know  nothing  more  than  that  he  was  a 
fisherman  sufficiently  well-to-do  to  have  hired  servants 
of  his  own/     He  was  thus  in  more  prosperous  circum- 

1  Mark  i.  20. 


108  THE    EARLY   DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

stances  than  his  partner  Jonas,  the  father  of  Peter  and 
Andrew.  His  wife  was  Salome,  sister  of  the  Virgin 
Mary.  The  fact  that  she  was  one  of  those  who  min- 
istered to  the  Lord  of  her  substance,  and  also  bought 
large  stores  of  spices  for  His  grave,  are  additional  signs 
that  Zabdia  and  his  wife  were  not  poor.  Their  sons 
were  James  and  John,  who  were  thus  first  cousins  of 
our  Lord  according  to  the  flesh. ^ 

We  catch  no  glimpse  of  John  till  we  see  him  among 
the  disciples  of  the  Baptist  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan. 
We  are  told  however  that,  in  his  manhood,  he  appeared 
to  the  learned  Sanhedrists  of  Jerusalem  to  be  a  "  simple 
and  unlettered  "  man."  Doubtless  the  term  which  they 
actually  used  was  the  contemptuous  am-haarets,  a  tech- 
nical expression  far  more  scornful  than  its  literal  trans- 
lation, "people  of  the  land."^  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that 
he  had  never  been  what  they  called  "  a  pupil  of  the 
wise,"  and  had  not  been  trained  in  that  cumbrous 
system  of  the  Oral  Law  which  they  regarded  as   the 

^  Nicephorus  and  others  rightly  call  Zebedee  l5iovavK\j]pov,  "  an  inde- 
pendent fisherman  with  a  ship  of  his  own."  Wliat  St.  Chrysostom  {Horn. 
i.  in  Joann.)  says  of  the  extreme  poverty  and  humility  of  his  lot  [ovSkv 
■K(v4(7Tipov  ovie  drfXta-Tepov,  k.t.\.)  is  rhetorical  exaggeration  (see  Lampe, 
Prolegomena,  p.  5).  The  Lake  of  Galilee  was  extraordinarily  rich  in  fish, 
some  of  which  were  regarded  as  great  delicacies,  and — like  the  coracinus — 
were  extremely  rare.  The  trade  in  fish  at  Tiberias,  Sepphoris,  Tarichese, 
and  especially  at  Jerusalem,  was  so  active  that  a  leading  fisherman  like 
Zabdia  must  have  been  almost  rich. 

*  Acts  iv.  13.  A  man  was  called  a  mere  ignoramus  {am-haarets)  even 
if  he  knew  the  Scripture  and  the  Mishna,  but  had  never  been  one  of  the 
"  pupils  of  the  wise  "  [Thahnklt  hachakamim).  If  he  knew  only  the  Scrip- 
tures, he  was  called  " au  empty  cistern"  (bur)  (Wagenseil,  Sota,  p.  517). 
The  idiotes  is  one  who  is  no  authority  on  a  subject  (see  Orig.  c.  Cels.  i.  30). 
Augustine  calls  the  Apostles  "  ineruditos  .  .  .  non  peritos  grammaticae, 
uon  ariuatos  dialectica,  non  rlietorica  inflatos  "  {De  Civ.  Dei,  xxii.  5). 

5  For  the  meaning  and  associations  of  this  word  see  Dr.  McCaul,  Old 
Paths,  pp.  458—464. 


GREATNESS  OF  ST.   JOHN".  103 

only  learning.  It  was  well  for  him  that  he  had  not. 
The  Rabbinism  of  that  day  was  nothing  better  than  a 
system  of  scholastic  pedantry,  impotent  for  every 
spiritual  end,  like  many  another  vaunted  system  of 
purely  verbal  orthodoxy,  yet  tending  to  inflate  the  minds 
of  its  votaries  with  the  conceit  of  knowledge  without 
the  reality.  Of  such  learning  it  might  well  be  said,  in 
the  words  of  Heraclitus,  that  "  it  teaches  nothing."  ^ 

On  the  other  hand,  we  see  from  St.  John's  own 
writings  that  he  was  a  man  of  consummate  natural 
gifts,  and  that  he  had  been  so  far  well  educated  as  to 
be  acquainted  with  both  Greek  and  Hebrew,^  of  which 
the  latter  was  not  an  ordinary  acquirement  even  of  well- 
educated  Jews.  Apart  from  his  unequalled  capacity  for 
the  reception  of  spiritual  grace,  his  natural  gifts  appear 
in  his  deep  insight  into  the  human  heart ;  in  the 
dramatic  power  with  which,  by  a  few  touches,  he  sets 
before  us  the  most  vivid  conception  of  the  most  varied 
characters ;  in  his  style,  apparently  so  simple  yet  really 
so  profound — a  style  supremely  beautiful,  yet  unlike 
that  of  any  other  writer,  whether  sacred  or  profane ;  and, 
above  all,  in  the  fact  that  he  was  a  fit  and  chosen  vessel 
for  that  consummate  truth — the  Incarnation  of  the 
Word  of  Grod.  That  truth,  while  with  one  swift 
stroke  it  summarised  the  speculations  of  Alexandrian 
theosophy,  became  in  its  turn  the  starting-point  for 
the  most  sacred  utterances  of  all  Christian  thinkers 
till  the  end  of  time. 

His  native  Galilee  was  inhabited  by  the  bravest  and 

^   TToXvfjiadiri  oil  StddffKei  (Heracl.). 

-  Tlie  quotations  of  St.  John  in  the  Gospel  are  not  always  taken  direct 
from  the  LXX.,  but  are  sometimes  altered  into  more  direct  accordance 
with  the  Hebrew  (xix.  37  ;  vi.  45 ;  xiii.  18). 


110  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

truest  race  in  Palestine.^  They  were  remarkable  for 
faithfulness  to  their  theocratic  nationality.  They  de- 
tested and  were  ashamed  of  alike  the  Roman  dominion 
and  the  Herodian  satrapy  which  was  its  outward  sign. 
Their  temperaments  were  full  of  an  enthusiasm  which 
easily  caught  fire.  The  revolt  of  Judas  of  Galilee 
against  the  registrations  of  Quirinus  showed  the  indig- 
nation with  which  Galileans  contemplated  the  reduction 
of  the  Holy  Land  to  the  degraded  position  of  a  Roman 
province.  The  watchword  of  that  uprising  was  that  the 
Chosen  People  should  have  "  no  Lord  or  master  but 
God."  Wild  and  hopeless  as  the  insurrection  was,  and 
terribly  as  it  was  avenged,  its  failure  was  so  far  from 
quenching  the  spirit  of  patriotism  by  which  it  had 
been  instigated,  that  it  was  not  difficult  for  the  sons  of 
Judas  long  years  afterwards^  to  fan  the  hot  embers  into 
tlame.^  The  revolt  of  Judas  took  place  when  St.  John 
was  about  twelve  years  old — the  age  at  which  a  Jewish 
boy  began  to  enter  on  the  responsibilities  of  manhood. 
It  was  impossible  that  an  event  which  produced  so 
widespread  an  agitation  should  have  failed  to  leave  an 
impression  on  his  memory.  His  sympathies  must  have 
been  with  the  aims,  if  not  with  the  acts,  of  the  daring 
patriot.  In  both  the  sons  of  Zebedee  we  trace  a  certain 
fiery  vehemence,  and  this  it  was  which  earned  for  them 
from  the  Lord  the  title  of  "  Boanerges."*   It  is  probable 

'  Jos.  Antt.  xviii.  1.  §  I,  6 ;  B.  J.  ii.  8,  §  I. 

-  A.D.  8  of  our  era. 

2  In  A.D.  47  and  A.D.  66. 

*  Boanerges,  "  Bcni-regesh  "  (Mark  iii.  17).  No  donbt  the  title  was 
earned  by  the  lire  and  impetuosity  of  their  nature;  not  because  they 
were,  as  Theophylact  says,  "  niiglity  heralds  and  divines  "  (Theophyl.  in 
Mark  i. ;  Epiphan.  Haer.  73 ;  Cyrill.  Alex,  ad  Nestor.  1).  For  a  multi- 
tude  of  the  guesses  about  a  matter  perfectly  simple,  see  Lampe,  Prolegom. 
24—30. 


MESSIANIC  HOPES.  Ill 

that  they  shared  in  some  of  the  views  which  had  once 
actuated  their  brother  Apostle,  the  Zealot  Simon. ^ 

If  the  home  of  Zebedee  was  in  or  near  Bethsaida,  his 
two  sons  must  have  grown  up  in  constant  intercourse 
with  Philip  and  Andrew  and  Peter,  and  with  his  cousins, 
the  sons  of  AJphseus,  and  with  Nathanael  of  the  not- 
far-distant  Cana.  Whether  he  ever  visited  the  home 
of  the  Virgin  at  Nazareth,  and  saw  the  sinless  youth 
of  Jesus,  and  the  sternly  legal  faithfulness  of  "  His 
brethren,"  we  do  not  know,  but  in  any  case  we  can  see 
that  he  enjoyed  that  best  of  training  which  consists 
in  being  brought  up  in  the  midst  of  sweet  and  noble 
natures,  and  in  the  free  fresh  life  of  a  hardy  calling  and 
a  beautiful  land.  And  what  most  of  all  ennobled  the 
aspirations  of  these  young  Galileans  was  that,  with 
perfect  trust  in  Grod,  they  were  waiting  for  the  consola- 
tion of  Israel — they  were  cherishing  the  thought  which 
lay  at  the  very  heart  of  all  that  was  best  and  deepest 
in  the  old  Covenant — the  hope  that  the  promised 
Messiah  at  length  would  come. 

We  are  not  told  a  single  particular  about  his  early 
years.  We  first  see  him — evidently  in  the  prime  of 
early  manhood — as  a  disciple  of  the  Baptist.^  He  does 
not  mention  himseK  by  name,  because  in  his  Grospel  he 
shows  a  characteristic  reserve.  But  there  never  has 
been  a  doubt  that  he  is  the  disciple  who  was  with  St. 
Andrew  when  they  heard  from  their  Master  the  words 
which  were  to  influence  their  whole  future  life.  The 
Baptist  had  received  the  deputation   which   the  San- 

'  Luke  vi.  15,  Kananite=Ze;Llot.  The  Zealots  formed  the  "  extreme 
left  "  division  of  the  Pharisees  politically,  as  the  Essenes  did  religiously. 

^  Ecclesiastical  tradition  says  that  he  was  called  "  adolescentior,'' 
and  even  ''puer."  Paulin.  Nol.  Ep.  51.  Ambros.  Ofic.  ii.  20,  §  101. 
Aug.  c.  Faust.  XXX.  4.     Jer.  c.  Jovin,  i.  26. 


11-2  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

hedrin  had  sent  to  enquire  into  his  claims,  and  bad 
told  them  that  he  was  not  the  Christ,  nor  Elijah,  nor 
"the  Prophet."  On  the  next  day  he  saw  Jesus  coming 
towards  him  on  His  return  from  the  temptation  in  the 
wilderness.  Then  first  he  said,  "  Behold  the  Lamb  ot 
God  which  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  world ! "  and 
testified  that  he  bad  seen  the  Spirit  descending  from 
heaven  like  a  dove,  and  it  abode  upon  Him.  Again, 
the  next  day,  fixing  his  eyes  on  Jesus  as  He  walked 
by,  he  exclaimed,  "  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God !  "  At 
once  the  two  disciples  followed  Jesus.  Turning  and 
gazing  on  them  as  they  followed.  He  said,  "What 
are  ye  seeking  ? "  Giving  Him  the  highest  title  of 
reverence  they  knew,  the  simple  Galileans  answered, 
"  Rabbi,  where  stayest  thou  ? "  He  saith  to  them, 
"  Come  and  see."  They  came  and  saw.  It  was  now 
four  in  the  evening,  and  they  stayed  with  Him  that 
night. 

That  brief  intercourse  sufficed  to  convince  them  that 
Jesus  w^as  the  Christ.  The  next  morning  Andrew 
sought  his  brother  Simon,  and  with  the  simple  startling 
announcement,  "  We  have  found  the  Messiah,"  led  him 
to  the  Lord. 

It  is  not  mentioned  that  St.  John  sought  his  brother, 
and  it  is  clear  that  the  elder  son  of  Zebedee  was  not 
called  to  full  discipleship  till  afterwards  on  the  Sea  of 
Galilee.  It  was  from  no  difference  in  character  that 
James  did  not,  so  far  as  we  know,  become  a  hearer  of 
the  Baptist.  He  was  earning  his  daily  bread  as  a 
fisherman,  and  may  have  found  no  opportunity  to  leave 
the  Plain  of  Gennesareth.  I  have  ventured  elsewhere 
to  conjecture  the  reason  why  St.  John  was  able  to  seek 
the   ministry  of   the  Baptist  though   his  brother  was 


A  DISCIPLE   OF  THE  BAPTIST.  113 

not.^  He  had  some  connexion  with  Jerusalem,  and 
even  had  a  home  there. ^  We  find  an  explanation  of 
this  in  the  fact  that  the  fish  of  the  Lake  of  Galilee 
were  largely  supplied  to  Jerusalem,  and  nothing  is 
more  probable  than  that  Zebedee,  as  a  master  fisher- 
man, should  have  sent  his  younger  son,  at  least 
occasionally,  to  the  Holy  City  to  superintend  what 
must  have  been  one  of  the  most  lucrative  branches 
of  his  trade.  If  so,  it  would  have  been  easy  for  St. 
John  to  reach  in  less  than  a  day  the  banks  of 
Jordan,  and  to  listen  to  the  mighty  voice  which  was 
then  rousing  Priests  and  Pharisees  as  well  as  people 
from  their  sensual  sleep. 

The  teaching  of  the  Baptist  appealed  to  the  sternest 
instincts  of  his  youthful  follower.  Its  lofty  morality, 
its  uncompromising  denunciations,  its  dauntless  inde- 
pendence must  have  exercised  a  strong  fascination  over 
the  young  Galilean.  It  made  him  more  than  ever  a 
Son  of  Thunder.  It  has  been  said  of  John  the  Baptist 
that  he  was  like  a  burning  torch — that  the  whole  man 
was  an  Apocalypse.  In  the  Apocalypse  of  him  who 
was  for  a  time  his  disciple,  we  still  seem  to  hear  echoes 
of  that  ringing  voice,  to  catch  hues  of  earthquake  and 
eclipse  from  tbat  tremendous  imagery. 

The  question  here  arises  whether  St.  John  was  or 
was  not  unmarried.  The  ancient  Fathers  are  fond  of 
speaking  of  him  as  a  "  virgin."  As  early  as  the  pseudo- 
Ignatius  we  find  an  address  to  "  Virgins,"  i.e.,  celibates, 
with  the  prayer,  "  May  I  enjoy  your  holiness  as  that 
of  Elijah,  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun,  Melchizedek,  Elisha, 

^  See  Life  of  Christ,  i.  IM. 

^  John  xix.  27.     "  From  that  hour  the  Disciple  took  her  to  his  owu 
home"  {(Is  TO  r5m\ 


114  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Jeremiah,  John  the  Baptist,  the  Beloved  Disciple, 
Timothy,  Evodius,  and  Clemens."  Nothing  corres- 
ponding to  this  praise  of  "  virginity  "  is  found  either 
in  the  Scripture  or  in  the  earliest  Fathers,  for  "  the 
virgins"  of  Rev.  xiv.  14,  and  "those  who  have  made 
themselves  eunuchs  for  Christ's  sake  "  of  Matt.  xix.  12, 
are  expressions  which,  when  taken  in  the  sense  which 
was  familiar  to  the  Jews  themselves,  convey  no  such 
exaltation  of  the  unwedded  life.^  Tertullian,  however, 
in  his  book  "  On  Single  Marriage,"  calls  St.  John 
"  C/iJ'isti  spado''  and  St.  Jerome,  filled  with  his  monastic 
f/nosis  on  this  subject,  says  that  "  when  St.  John  wished 
to  marr}''  his  Lord  restrained  him."  ^  Similar  testimony 
is  repeated  by  St.  Augustine,  Epiphanius,  and  others,  but 
it  only  seems  to  have  been  derived  from  the  "  Acts  "  of 
Leucius.  Apart  from  direct  evidence,  all  the  customs 
of  the  Jews  make  it  extremely  improbable,  and  St. 
Paul  tells  us  that  "  the  rest  of  the  Jpostles "  as  well 
as  Kephas  were  married.^  The  notion  of  his  celibacy 
was  strengthened  by  the  erroneous  misreading  of  a 
superscription  to  his  first  epistle  which  is  itself  erro- 
neous. Augustine  in  one  place  quotes  1  John  iii.  2, 
as  occurring  in  St.  John's  letter  ''to  the  Parthians,"  ^ 
and  he  is  followed  by  Idacius  Clarus,  and  (according  to 

•  See  the  passages  of  Zohar  quoted  by  Schottgen,  p.  159. 

'^  Tert.  De  Monogamia,  17;  Epiplian.  Haer.  Iviii. ;  Jer.  c.  Jovinian. 
1,  14,  aiid  iu  jjroZegr.  Joann.,  Praef.  in  Matt.,  ad  Is.  Ivi.  4.  Aug.  c.  Faust. 
XXX.  4.  The  virginity  of  St.  Joliii  became  a  commonplace  with  the  Eccle- 
siastical writers.  See  Chrysostom.  De  Virg.  82  (Oj)}^-  i.  332),  Ps.  Clirysostom 
{0pp.  viii.  2,  246,  ed.  Montfaucou)  where  Petor  is  a  type  of  crf/j.foyafj.la,  and 
John  of  irapdevia.  Ambrose,  De  Inst.  Virg.  viii.  50.  The  belief  originated 
in  the  ArJs  of  Leucius.     See  Zalin,  Acta  Joannis,  c.  ciii. 

^  2  Cor.  xi.  2,  on  which  Ambrosiaster  remarks  "  omnes  Apostoli,  ex- 
cepto  Johanne  et  Paulo  uxores  habuerunt." 

*  Est.  Praef.  in  1  John. 


THE  EARLY   CALL.  115 

Bede)  by  Atlianasius.  But  as  there  are  also  traces 
of  its  having  been  called  "  a  letter  to  Virgins,''  it  has 
been  supposed  that  Parthos  is  a  mistaken  contraction 
for  parfhenous,  or  vice  versa.  But  even  if  St.  John 
had  thus  written  a  letter  to  "  virgins,"  it  would  not 
be  a  necessary  inference  that  he  was  himself  un- 
married, or  even  that  "  virgins "  and  celibates  were 
equivalent  terms.^ 

The  first  call  of  St.  John  on  the  banks  of  Jordan 
was  not  the  final  call.  St.  John  accompanied  Jesus 
to  the  marriage  feast  of  Cana  in  Galilee,  and  saw 
Him  manifest  forth  His  glory.  Then,  during  the  early 
ministry  of  Jesus  in  Southern  Judaea,  the  little  band 
of  brethren  seem  to  have  resumed  for  a  time  their 
ordinary  avocations. 

It  was  on  the  Lake  of  Galilee,  after  the  miraculous 
draught  of  fishes,  that  there  came  to  him  the  decisive 
call — "Follow  Me."  He  obeyed  the  call.  With  his 
brother  he  left  his  father  Zebedee  and  the  boat,  and 
the  hired  servants — left  all,  and  followed  Jesus.  Of 
Zebedee  we  hear  no  more.  It  is  probable  that  he  died 
soon  afterwards ;  for  in  the  bright  year  of  the  Galilean 
ministry,  before  Jesus  was  driven  to  fly  northward, 
and  to  wander  through  semi-heathen  districts,  we  find 
Salome,  the  mother  of  James  and  John,  among  "the 
women  who  ministered  unto  Him  of  their  substance." 

The  Apostles  whom  the  Lord  gathered  finally 
around  Him  before  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  fall 
into  three  groups  of  four,  of  which  the  first  and  most 
privileged    consisted    of   Andrew,    Peter,    James,    and 

'  Another  cause  of  this  belief  was  the  fancy  that  our  Lord  specially 
approved  of  St.  John's  celibacy,  and  that  this  also  was  the  reason  why 
the  Virgin  was  entrusted  to  his  care.     Zahu,  Acta  Joannis,  p.  201,  seqq. 

i  2 


116  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

John ;  of  these  again  the  last  three  were  the  most 
chosen  of  the  chosen.^  Alone  of  the  Apostles  they 
were  permitted  to  witness  the  Raising  of  Jairus's 
daughter,  the  Transfiguration,  and  the  Agony  in  the 
Grarden.  And  of  these  three  again  the  nearest  and 
dearest  was  John.  Of  both  Peter  and  John  it  might 
have  been  said  that  they,  more  than  all  the  rest,  were 
disciples  whom  Jesus  loved  as  j)ersonal  companions  ^ ;  but 
St.  John  alone — not  with  a  claim  of  vainglory,  but 
with  the  simple  testimony  of  truth — has  indicated  to 
us  unmistakably,  yet  with  dignified  reserve,  that  he 
was  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved  and  honoured  with 
the  affection  of  high  esteem.^  St.  Peter  was  the  more 
prominent  as  the  champion  of  the  Christ ;  St.  John 
was  the  closer  friend  of  Jesus.*  And  we  see  in  his 
Gospel  the //roo/"  that  he  was  so.  The  Synoptists  witness 
faithfully  to  external  events.  St.  John  gives  a  far  more 
inward  picture.  He  writes  as  one  to  whom  it  had 
been  granted  to  know  something  of  his  Master's  inmost 
thoughts."^ 

And  yet  this  high  honour,  this  distinguishing  per- 
sonal affection,  arose  from  no  faultless  ideality  in  his 
character.  The  youth  with  whom  Italian  art  has  made  us 
familiar — the  youth  of  unearthl}'-  beauty,  with  features 

'  'Ek\(ktwv  4K\fKT0T€povs  (Clem.  Alcx.). 

^  In  John  XX.  2  we  have  the  expression  tpxerai  vphs  2,(fxuva  Tltrpoy  kuI 
irphs  rhv  &\\ov  fiad-nrriv  Sv  i<p[\ei  6  'It}(tovs.  From  the  change  of  term 
{4<pl\ei,  not  as  in  other  places  riydwa),  and  from  the  structure  of  the 
sentence,  Canon  Westcott  {ad  loc.)  infers,  with  much  probability,  that 
Peter  is  here  included  in  the  description. 

^  riyaira,  xiii.  23 ;  xix.  26  ;  xxi.  7,  20. 

*  St.  Peter  lias  been  called  ^i\6xpiaros,  St.  John  ♦iA.ojtjo-oi/i. 

*  See  John  vi.  6,  61,  64 :  jjSei  yap  ^{  ipx^s  k.t.K.  ivf&pifx'^aaTO  rif 
■Trvfv/xaTi  Kal  irapa^ev  iavrSy,  xi.  33 ;  xiii.  1,  3,  11,  21.  irapaxOr]  rcf  irv^v- 
jj-ari,  xviii.  4  ;   xix.  28,  &C. 


EARLY  IMPERFECTION.  117 

of  almost  feminine  softness,  with  the  long  bright  locks 
streaming  down  his  neck,  and  the  eagle  by  his  side, 
is  not  the  St.  John  of  the  New  Testament :  he  is 
neither  the  St.  John  of  the  Synoptists  and  the  Apoca- 
Ij^pse,  nor  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  Epistles — but 
is  the  one-sided  idealisation  of  Christian  painters.^ 
Jesus  loved  him  because  of  his  warm  affections,  his 
devoted  faithfulness,  his  glowing  zeal,  his  passionate 
enthusiasm  ;  not  because  his  character  as  yet  approached 
perfection.  The  young  St.  John  had  very  much  both  to 
learn  and  to  unlearn.  He  participated  in  the  faults 
of  fretfulness,  impatience,  emulous  selfishness,  ambitious 
literalism,  want  of  consideration,  want  of  tenderness, 
dulness  of  understanding,  and  hardness  of  heart,  which, 
as  the  Gospels  so  faithfully  tell  us,  were  common  to 
all  the  disciples.^  ^^J  more,  it  is  remarkable  that,  in 
nearly  every  instance  in  which  he  is  brought  into  pro- 
minence, either  singly  or  with  his  brother,  it  is  in 
connexion  with  some  error  of  perception  or  fault  of 
conduct.  He  had  to  unlearn  the  exaggeration  of  the 
very  tendencies  which  gave  to  his  character  so  much 
of  its  human  charm.  He  had  to  learn  lessons  of 
tolerance,  lessons  of  mercy,  lessons  of  humility,  which 
perhaps  it  took  him  his  whole  life  to  understand 
in  all  their  fulness  as  falling  under  the  one  law  of 
Christian  love. 

1.  Thus  on  one  occasion  a  selfish  dispute  had  arisen 
among  the  Apostles  as  to  which  of  them  should  be  the 
greatest.^     Our  Lord  rebuked  it  by  taking  a  little  child 

^  Pictures  of  St.  Jolin  existed  in  early  days  among  the  Carpocratians. 
See  the  fragments  of  Leucius  in  Zahn,  p.  223. 

2  Matt.  XV.  16 ;  xvi,  6 — 12  ;  John  xii.  16 ;  Mark  ix.  33 ;  Luke  ix.  49  ; 
xxii.  24 ;  xxiv.  25,  &c.  ^  L^ke  ix.  49 ;  Mark  ix.  38. 


118  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

and  saying,  by  way  of  consolation  as  well  as  by  way 
of  reproof,  "Whosoever  shall  receive  this  little  child 
in  My  name,  receiveth  Me."  ^  The  conscience  of  St. 
John  seems  to  have  smitten  him  as  he  listened  to 
the  tender  and  moving  lesson,  and  with  an  ingenuous 
impulse  he  confessed  to  having  taken  part  in  conduct 
which  now  struck  him  as  a  fault.  "  Master,"  he  said, 
"  we  saw  one  in  Thy  name  trying  to  cast  out  the 
demons,  and  we  prevented  him,  because  he  does  not 
follow  with  us."  To  prevent  him  had  been  a  natural 
impulse  of  sectarian  pride  and  ecclesiastical  jealousy. 
The  man  was  not  an  Apostle,  not  even  a  professed  dis- 
ciple ;  what  right  had  he  thus,  as  it  were,  to  steal  the 
credit  of  miracles  which  belonged  to  the  Lord  only,  and 
which  He  had  delegated  to  none  but  His  genuine  fol- 
lowers? "Who,"  St.  John  may  have  thought,  "is 
this  unknown  exorcist,  who  thus  encroaches  on  our 
privileges  ?  "  and  so,  with  other  Apostles,  he  had  dis- 
owned the  man,  and  peremptorily  forbidden  him.~  It 
was  an  impulse  somewhat  similar  to  that  which  had 
made  Joshua  exclaim,  "  0  my  lord  Moses  forbid  them," 
when  he  heard  that  Eldad  and  Medad  were  prophesying 
in  the  camp.  Instantly  and  nobly  the  great  law-giver 
had  answered,  "Enviest  thou  for  my  sake?  Would 
God  that  all  the  Lord's  people  were  prophets,  and 
that  the  Lord  would  put  His  Spirit  upon  them."^ 
So  now  came  at  once  the  answer,  the  spirit  of  which  in 
two   thousand   years  Christians  have  hardly    begun  to 


'  An  old  tradition,  mentioned  by  Hilary,  seems  strangely  to  have  said 
that  St.  John  was  the  boy  to  whom  Jesus  pointed  in  order  to  rebuke  the 
ambition  of  the  disciples.     See  Zahn,  Acta  Joannis,  p.  cxxxiv. 

^  Luke  ix.  49      iKuKixraiJ.fi'. 

3  Nnm.  xi.  38 


VIOLENCE  HATEFUL  TO  GOD.  119 

learn,   "  Prevent  him.  not !  for  he  who  is   not   against 
us,  is  on  our  side." 

2.  But,  once  again,  John  and  his  brother  James 
had  needed  a  stern  and  public  lesson.  They  had  been 
taught  that  sectarian  jealousy  is  alien  from  the  heart 
of  Christ ;  they  had  now  to  learn  that  religious  in- 
tolerance and  cruel  severity  are  violations  of  His  spirit. 
They  had  to  learn,  or  begin  to  learn,  the  lesson — of 
which  (once  more)  nineteen  centuries  have  failed  to 
convince  the  self-styled  representatives  of  Churches — 
that  violence  is  hateful  to  Grod.^ 

The  incident  occurred  at  the  beginning  of  the  Lord's 
great  public  journey  from  Gralilee  to  Jerusalem,  when 
He  now  openly  assumed  the  dignity  of  the  Messiah, 
and  was  accomipanied  not  only  by  His  disciples,  but  by 
a  multitude  of  followers,  all — like  Himself — pilgrims  on 
their  way  to  the  Holy  City.  The  first  village  which 
lies  between  the  borders  of  Gralilee  and  Samaria,  at 
the  foot  of  the  Hills  of  Ephraim,  is  the  pleasant 
village  of  En  Gannim,  or  the  "  Fountain  of  Gardens," 
then,  as  now,  inhabited  by  a  rude  and  fanatical  com- 
munity. The  numbers  of  His  retinue,  and  the  fact 
that  He  was  now  about  to  enter  on  the  territory  of 
Samaria,  made  it  necessary  to  send  messengers  before 
Him  to  provide  for  His  reception.  It  was  not  always 
that  the  Galileans  ventured  to  take  the  road  through 
Samaria,  for  the  intense  exacerbation  between  Jews  and 
Samaritans  constantly  showed  itself  by  collisions  be- 
tween Samaritans  and  Passover  pilgrims.  Still  this 
road  was  taken  sometimes  by  the  festival  caravans,  and 
it  may  be  that  our  Lord  was  willing  to  test  whether 
the  memory  of  His  previous  stay  among  the  Samari- 

^   B/a  tx^plv  Qecp. 


120  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

tans  would  secure  for  Himself  and  His  followers  a 
friendly  welcome.  But  one  of  the  numberless  quarrels 
which  were  constantly  arising  had  made  the  Samaritans 
more  than  usually  hostile.  Violating  the  rule  of  hospi- 
tality, though  it  is  the  very  first  rule  of  Eastern  life, 
the  villagers  of  En  Grannim  refused  to  receive  the  Mes- 
sianic band. 

It  was  a  flagrant  wrong  thus  to  dismiss  a  weary 
and  hungry  multitude  at  the  foot  of  the  frontier 
hills,  at  a  distance  from  other  villages,  and  at  the 
beginning  of  their  sacred  pilgrimage.  But  besides 
this  it  was  an  undisguised  insult,  a  refusal,  open  as 
that  of  the  Gradarenes,  to  admit  the  now  public  claims 
of  Him  who  asked  their  courtesy.  Instantly  the  hot 
spirit  of  the  sons  of  Zebedee  took  fire.  It  was  in  this 
very  country  that  Elijah,  to  avenge  a  much  smaller 
wrong,  had  called  down  fire  from  Heaven.^  Had  not 
the  time  arrived  for  One  greater  than  Elijah  to  vindi- 
cate His  majesty,  and  to  revive  by  some  signal  miracle 
the  drooping  spirits  of  His  followers  ?  "  And  on 
seeing  it  His  disciples  James  and  John  said.  Lord, 
wiliest  Thou  we  should  bid  fire  to  descend  from  heaven, 
and  consume  them,  as  even  Elijah  did  ? "  What 
wonder,  it  has  been  said,  "  that  the  Sons  of  Thunder 
should  wish  to  flash  lightning?  "  But  how  significant 
are  the  touches  of  character  even  in  those  few  words, 
"Wiliest  Thou  that  loe — "!  They  want  to  take  part 
in  the  miracle  themselves.  They,  too,  have  been  in- 
sulted in  the  person  of  their  Lord.  They  have  an 
uneasy  sense  that  calling  down  fire  from  heaven  does 
not  quite  accord  with  the  character  of  Him  who  "  went 
about  doing  good,"  but  they  are  ready  to  undertake  the 

1  2  Kings  i.  9—14. 


THE  ELIJAH-SPIRIT.  121 

task  for  him.  Yet,  even  in  expressing  tlie  wish,  they 
feel  a  little  touch  of  shame.  Is  not  such  conduct  vin- 
dictive and  impatient  ?  Well,  at  least,  their  excuse  is 
ready — "  as  Elijah  did."  They  can  shelter  themselves 
behind  a  great  name.  For  their  earthly  wrath  they  can 
adduce  a  Scripture  precedent.  They  have  "  a  text  " 
ready  to  consecrate  their  personal  resentment.  Alas  ! 
had  it  been  in  their  power  to  make  the  heavens  blaze 
they  would  but  have  furnished  another  instance  of  the 
crimes  which  have  been  committed  or  excused  in  the 
name  of  Scripture.  What  is  it  that  we  learn  from 
remorseless  persecutions,  bitter  hatreds  between  those 
who  bear  the  common  name  of  Christian — from  the 
atrocities  of  the  Inquisition,  from  savage  Crusades, 
from  brutal  witch-murders,  from  the  fires  of  Smithfield 
and  of  Toledo,  from  the  condonation  and  even  the 
approval  of  mere  assassins,  from  medals  struck  in 
honour  of  massacres  of  St.  Bartholomew,  from  sermons 
preached  amid  the  agonies  of  martyrs,  from  the  slanders 
and  calumnies  weekly  used  to  write  down  imaginary 
opponents  by  those  who  think  that  in  the  hideous  forms 
of  their  fanaticism  they  are  doing  God  service  ? — what 
do  we  learn  from  these  most  miserable  and  blood-stained 
pages  of  ecclesiastical  controversy,  but  that 

"  In  religion 
What  damned  error  but  some  sober  brow 
Will  bless  it  and  approve  it  with  a  text, 
Hiding  the  grossness  with  fair  ornament "  1 

But  the  lesson  of  all  Scripture  is  that,  though  the 
Elijah -times  may  require  the  Elijah -spirit,  yet  the 
Elijah-times  have  passed  for  ever,  and  that  the  Elijah- 
spirit  is  not  the  Christ-spirit.     For  Christians,  at  any 


122  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

rate,  it  is  written,  bright  and  large,  over  every  page  of 
the  New  Testament,  that  "the  wrath  of  man  worketh 
not  the  righteousness  of  God."  ^  And  how  full  of  in- 
struction is  Christ's  reproof!  He  does  not  stop  or 
stoop  to  argue.  He  does  not  unfold  the  hidden  springs 
of  selfishness  and  passion  which  had  caused  their  fierce 
request.  He  does  not  dispute  their  Scripture  precedent. 
He  does  not  point  out  that  texts  must  be  misused  if 
they  be  applied  to  exacerbate  human  hatreds  born 
in  the  inflation  of  religious  vanity.  He  does  not 
reproach  them  for  the  indifference  to  the  agony  of 
others  which  lay  in  the  words  "  Wiliest  Thou  we 
should  bid  fire  to  descend  from  Heaven  and  consume 
them  ? "  No ;  but,  turning  round,  He  rebuked  them, 
and  said,  "  Ye  know  not — ye — of  what  spirit  ye  are." 
For  the  Son  of  Man  came  not  to  destroy  men's  souls, 
but  to  save."  His  words  were  brief  and  compassionate, 
because  in  their  error,  flagrant  as  it  Avas,  there  was 
still  a  root  of  nobleness.  Their  zeal  for  the  Lord, 
their  love  of  His  person,  their  impassioned  estimate  of 
the  heinousness  of  any  insult  directed  against  Him — 
these  were  the  salt  of  good  motives  w^hich  saved  their 
conduct  from  being  entirely  evil.  Where  they  erred 
was  in  the  fancy  that  love  to  Him  can  be  rightly 
shown  by    fury   and   vengeance   against    those    whom 

^  The  ueedfulness  of  the  lesson  becomes  even  more  clear  when  we  find 
St.  Ambrose  (m  Luke  ix.  54,  55)  deliberately  defending  the  Apostles  : 
"  Nee  discipnli  peccant,  qui  legem  sequuntnr,"  &c.  How  greatly  do  we 
all  need  to  oifer  the  prayer — 

"  Let  not  this  weak  unknowing  hand 
Presume  Thy  bolts  to  throw, 
And  deal  damnation  round  the  laud 
On  each  I  judge  my  foe." 

-  Luke  X.  55.  diov  irvevfiarSs  iffTe  vf.fis.  Both  the  expression  of  the 
word  iifiits  and  its  position  make  it  extremely  emphatic. 


Bia    i'xPpov    0ec3.  123 

they  deemed  to  be  His  enemies  ;  and  that  it  was  His 
will  that  any  should  perish  rather  than  come  to  re- 
pentance. It  was  a  lesson,  for  all  ages,  of  infinite 
tenderness  and  infinite  tolerance ;  a  lesson  which 
during  these  long  centuries  theologians  and  religious 
parties  and  partisans  have  for  the  most  part  failed  to 
learn.  Of  old,  when  it  was  permitted  them,  they 
resorted  to  chains  and  stakes  ;  now  that  the  secular 
weapons  have  been  struck  out  of  their  grasp,  they 
shoot  out  their  arrows,  even  bitter  words.  And  they 
take  this  to  be  religion, — this  to  be  the  sort  of  service 
Avhich  Christ  approves  ! 

3.  Once  again  in  the  Gospels  the  sons  of  Zebedee 
come  into  separate  prominence,  and  once  again  they 
appear  as  disciples  who  have  misunderstood  Christ's 
promises,  and  but  imperfectly  learnt  His  lessons.  The 
incident  occurred  at  one  of  the  most  solemn  moments 
in  His  life.  From  the  plots  and  excommunications  of 
His  enemies,  with  a  heavy  price  upon  His  head.  He 
had  taken  refuge  in  deep  obscurity  in  the  little  town  of 
Ephraim.  There  He  remained  for  some  weeks  between 
the  death  of  Lazarus  and  the  Passover,^  until  from  the 
summit  of  the  conical  hill  on  which  the  little  town  was 
built.  He  could  see  the  long  trains  of  Galilean  pilgrims 
streaming  down  the  Jordan  valley  on  their  way  to 
Jerusalem.  Then  He  knew  that  He  could  join  them 
and  proceed  at  their  head  to  the  Holy  City.  He  set 
forth  to  what  He  foresaw  would  be  His  death  of 
agony  and  shame.  As  seems  to  have  been  common 
with  Him,  He  walked  alone,  and  in  front,  while  the 
Apostles  followed  in  a  group  at   some   little  distance 

^  John  xi.  54. 


124  THE    EARLY   DAYS  OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

behind  Him.  But  on  this  occasion  the  majest}'-  of  His 
]nirpose  seems  so  to  have  clothed  His  person  with  awe 
and  grandeur — He  seemed  to  be  so  transfigured  by  the 
halo  of  Divine  sorrow,  that — as  we  learn  from  St. 
Mark — in  one  of  those  unexplained  references  which 
he  doubtless  borrowed  from  the  reminiscences  of  St. 
Peter — the  disciples  as  they  walked  behind  Him  were 
amazed  and  full  of  fear.^  From  His  look  and  manner 
they  felt  instinctively  that  something  more  than 
usually  awful  was  at  hand.  Nor  did  He  leave  them 
long  in  doubt  as  to  what  it  was.  He  beckoned  them 
to  Him,  and  in  language  more  definite  and  unmis- 
takable than  ever  before,  He  revealed  to  them  not  onl}- 
that  He  should  be  betrayed,  and  mocked,  and  scourged, 
and  spit  upon,  but  even  the  crowning  horror  that  He 
should  be  crucified — and  then  that,  on  the  third  da}^ 
He  should  rise  again. 

It  was  at  tliat  most  inopportune  moment  that 
Salome  came  to  Him  with  her  two  sons,  James 
and  John,  worshipping  Him,  begging  Him  to  grant 
them  something.  The  facile  mother  was  but  the 
mouthpiece  for  the  ill -instructed  ambition  of  her 
sons.  Relying  on  her  near  earthly  relationship  to 
Him,  on  her  services  in  His  cause,  on  His  known 
regard  for  them  both,  on  His  special  affection  for  one 
of  them,  they  wanted  thus  to  forestall  the  rest,  and 
to  secure  a  special  and  personal  blessing  for  themselves. 
They  wanted  thus,  and  finally,  to  settle  the  dispute, 
which  had  so  often  arisen  among  the  half-trained 
Apostles,  as  to  which  of  them  should  have  the  prece- 
dence, which  should  be  the  greatest  among  them.     Yet 

>  Mark  x.  32. 


LOYE  AND  AMBITION.  125 

we  must  not  think  that  their  motive  was  altogether 
earthly  in  its  character.  It  was  not  all  selfishness ; 
it  was  not  mere  ambition — at  any  rate,  not  vulgar 
selfishness,  not  ignoble  ambition.  In  the  strange  com- 
plexity of  human  motives  there  was  doubtless  a  large 
admixture  of  these  impurer  elements,  and  there  was 
also  a  complete  ignorance  as  to  the  nature  of  the  ap- 
proaching end.  But  there  was  also  a  loving  desire 
to  be  nearest  to  Jesus,  one  at  His  right  hand,  one  at 
His  left.  They  had  thought  of  material  power  and 
splendour  in  their  interpretation  of  His  promises. 
His  thoughts  had  been  of  the  cross,  theirs  were  of 
the  throne.  In  their  ignorance  they  had  asked  for 
the  places  which,  seven  days  afterwards,  were  occupied 
in  infamy  and  anguish  by  two  crucified  robbers.  Oh, 
fond,  foolish  mother !  oh,  too  presumptuous  sons !  the 
kingdom  of  Heaven  is  not  as  ye  think.  It  is  not 
a  place  for  ambitious  precedence  and  selfish  rivalries. 
Not  there  do  Michael  and  Grabriel  contrast  the  respec- 
tive value  of  their  services,  or  compete  as  to  which 
shall  do  "  the  maximum  of  service  on  the  minimum  of 
grace."  There  the  success  of  each  is  the  joy  of  all, 
and  the  glory  of  each  the  pride  of  all.  Nor  is  there, 
as  ye  vainly  imagine,  any  favouritism,  any  private 
partiality,  any  acceptance  of  men's  persons  with  God 
and  with  His  Christ.  All  are  alike  the  children  of 
His  impartial  mercy — "  all  equally  guilty,  all  equally 
redeemed."  With  Him  many  of  the  first  shall  be  last, 
and  many  of  the  last  first,  and  many  whom  their 
brethren  would  altogether  exclude  shall  be  heirs  of  His 
common  heaven,  and  many  who,  on  earth,  figured  as 
saints,  and  great  divines,  shall  be  far  below  the  peasants 
and  little  ones  of  His  kingdom — and,   alas  !    here   on 


126  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

eartli,  how  many,  glorying  in  themselves,  have  delighted 
in  anathemas  and  misrepresentations — 

"  Wlio  there  below  .«hall  grovel  in  the  mire, 
Leaving  behind  them  horrible  dis21rai.se  ! " 

But  once  more,  because  the  request  was  not  all 
selfish  or  all  ignoble,  and  because  in  true  hearts 
deeper  lessons  spring  from  loving  forbearance  than 
from  loud  rebuke,  Jesus  gently  said  to  them,  "  Ye 
know  not  " — again,  "  Ye  know  not,"  for  it  was  igno- 
rance, not  badness,  from  which  their  errors  sprang 
— "  Ye  know  not  what  ye  are  asking  for  yourselves. 
Can  3'e  drink  the  cup  which  I  am  about  to  drink,  and 
be  baptised  with  the  baptism  wherewith  I  am  being 
baptised?"^  They  say  to  Him,  "We  can."  And  He 
saith  to  them,  "  My  cup  indeed  ye  shall  drink,  and  with 
the  baptism  wherewith  I  am  being  baptised  shall  ye 
be  baptised ;  but  to  sit  on  My  right  hand  and  on  My 
left  is  Mine  to  give  to  those  only  for  whom  it  has  been 
prepared  by  My  Father.""  In  that  bold  answer,  "  We 
can!"  had  flashed  out  all  the  true  nobleness  of  the 
sons  of  Zebedee.  For  the  answer  of  Jesus  had  by  that 
time  partially  undeceived  them.  It  had  shown  them 
the  mistaken  nature  of  their  chiliastic  hopes.  They 
saw  that  the  blessing  for  which  they  had  asked 
had  been,  so  far  as  things  earthly  were  concerned,  a 
primacy  of  sorrow ;  that  the  only  passage  to  Christ's 
throne  of  glory  lay  through  the  endurance  of  suffering ; 
that  to  be  near  Him  was — as  the  oldest  Christian  tradi- 
tion quoted  some  of  His  unrecorded  words — to  be  "near 
the  sword  and  near  the  fire  :  "^ — and  yet  they  had  not 

'  The  Fathers  speak  of  the  triple  baptism  iu  water,  by  the  Spirit,  and 
in  blood.  ^  Matt.  xx.  23. 

^   b  iyyvs  /xov  iyyvs  rov  irvpSs  (DidyiUUS  ill  Ps.  biXXviii.  8). 


ANGER   OF   THE   DISCIPLES.  127 

shrunk.  Whatever  the  price  was,  they  were  ready  to 
pay  it.     To  be  near  Him  was  worth  it  all. 

And  the  punishnient  of  their  fault  came  in  part 
and  at  once  in  the  indignant  disapproval  of  their 
fellow  Apostles.  The  other  disciples,  too,  had  their 
chiliastic  hopes ;  they  wanted  tlieir  thrones  and  their 
prerogatives  ;  and  all  that  had  been  selfish  and  un- 
worthy in  this  attempt  of  the  Sons  of  Thunder  to 
wring,  as  it  were,  from  private  influence  or  private 
kinsmanship  an  exclusive  privilege,  aroused  a  strong 
counter  selfishness.  Doubtless  the  voice  of  Judas  was 
loudest  in  the  complaint  that  this  was  a  mean  attempt 
to  steal  from  others  their  fair  share  of  a  private  ad- 
vantage ;  that  it  was  "  just  what  might  have  been 
expected  of  Salome  and  her  sons."  ^  But  instantly 
the  Lord  healed  the  rising  feud.  He  called  them  all 
round  Him.  He  taught  them  that  arrogant  lordship 
and  domineering  despotism'  were  the  characteristics  of 
Gentile  self-assertion.  "  Not  so  shall  it  be  among  you. 
But  whosoever  wills  to  become  great  among  you  shall 
be  your  servant ;  and  whosoever  wills  to  become  first 
of  you  shall  be  slave  of  all.  For  even  the  Son  of  Man 
came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to 
give  His  life  a  ransom  for  many." 

Yet  the  fault  and  the  rebuke  of  which  St.  John 
had  had  his  share  in  no  ways  alienated  from  him  the 
affection  of  his  Lord.  We  see  him  again  at  the  last 
supper,  and  he  is  leaning  on  Christ's  breast.  It  is 
from  this  that  he  gains  his  title  in  the  early  Church 
of  "the  bosom  disciple."^     Although  he  does  not  men- 

'  Matt.  XX.  24,  ol  SfKa  riyava.KTT]aav  -wepl  roiv  tvo  a5e\(pa)v. 
-  Mark  X.  42,  KaTaKupievovaiu     .     .  KaTe^ovaid^ouait/. 

^  6  firiaTr]6tos. 


128  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

tion  bis  own  name,  he  is  himself  the  describer  of  the 
incident.  Jesus  and  the  Twelve  are  reclining  at  the 
quasi-paschal  meal.  Our  Lord  is  in  the  centre  of  the 
couch  leaning  on  His  left  arm.  At  His  right,  in 
the  place  of  honour,  was  perhaps  Peter,  or  perhaps — 
as  an  office-bearer  of  the  little  band — the  traitor  Judas. 
At  his  left,  and  therefore  with  his  head  near  the 
breast  of  Jesus,  is  reclining  "  the  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved."  The  anguish  of  the  soul  of  Jesus  wrung  from 
Him  the  groan,  "  Verily,  verily,  I  say  to  you  that  one 
of  you  shall  betray  Me."  The  words  fell  very  terribly 
on  the  ears  of  the  Apostles.  They  began  to  gaze  on 
one  another  with  astonishment,  with  perplexity,  al- 
most with  mutual  suspicion.^  They  thought  that  if 
any  one  knew,  John  knew  the  secret ;  and  supposing  that 
Jesus  had  whispered  into  his  ear  the  fatal  name  which 
He  would  not  speak  aloud,  St.  Peter,  catching  his  eye 
by  a  sign,  whispered  to  him,  "  Tell  us  who  it  is  of 
whom  He  speaks  ?  "^  John  did  not  indeed  know  the 
traitor's  name,  but  leaning  back  his  head  with  a  sudden 
motion,  so  as  to  look  up  in  the  face  of  Jesus,^  he  said, 
"  Lord,  who  is  it  ?  "  Then  Jesus  whispered,  "It  is 
that  one  for  whom  I  shall  dip  the  sop,  and  give  it 
him."  He  dipped  the  piece  of  bread  in  the  common 
dish,  and  gave  it  to  Judas.  Then  Satan  entered  into 
him,  and  he  went  forth  into  the  night.  Believed  of 
the  oppression  of  that  painful  presence,  Jesus  began 
those  Divine  discourses  which  it  was  granted  to  John 

^   Jolin  xiii.  22,  iiropovfi-fvoi  irtpl  rlvoi  \fyei. 

2  B,  C,  L. 

3  John  xiii.  25,  iirnreawv,  not  "  leauiiig  "  {dvaKUfjuvos),  as  in  the  E.  V.,  but 
suddenly  changing  his  posture.  The  ovtws,  which  is  read  in  B,  C,  E,  F. 
etc.,  is  a  vivid  touch  of  reminiscence,  describing  the  actual  posture  as  in 
iv.  6. 


"KNOWN   TO    THE   HIGH  PRIEST."  129 

alone   to  preserve — so   "  rarely   mixed    of    sorrows    and 
joys,  and  studded  with  mysteries  as  with  emeralds." 

We  see  John  once  again,  with  Peter  and  James,  in 
the  Garden  of  Gethsemane  sleeping  the  sleep  of  sorrow 
and  weariness,  when  it  had  been  better  had  he  kept 
awake  ;  and  then  we  see  him  showing  no  greater  courage 
than  the  rest  when  "  all  the  disciples  forsook  Him  and 
fled." 

"  '  What  should  wring  this  from  thee  1 ' — ye  laugh  and  ask ; 
What  wrung  it  ]     Even  a  torchlight  and  a  noise,. 
The  sudden  Roman  faces,  violent  hands, 
And  fears  of  what  the  Jews  might  do  !     Just  that, 
And  it  is  written  '  I  forsook  and  fled.' 
There  was  my  trial,  and  it  ended  thus." ' 

But  if  he  was  one  of  those  who  fled,  he  was  the 
earliest  of  all  to  rejoin  his  Lord.  Braving  the  mul- 
titude, and  the  peril,  and  the  shame,  he  at  once  returned 
from  his  flight,  and  followed  the  group  who,  under  the 
traitor's  guidance,  were  leading  Jesus  bound  to  the 
joint  palace  of  Hanan  and  Caiaphas.  He  even  ventured 
to  enter  the  palace  with  those  who  were  guarding  the 
Prisoner.^  He  gained  admission  because  he  was  known 
to  the  High  Priest.  It  is  unlikely  that  this  has 
anything  to  do  with  the  fact  that  he  had  some 
distant  affinity  with  priestly  families,^  or  with  the 
strange  and  probably  symbolical  tradition  that,  in  his 
old  age  at  Ephesus,  he  wore  the  petalo?i  or  golden  plate 
which  marked  the  mitre  of  High  Priesthood.^  Nor  is 
it  easy  to   imagine  how  a  Galilean  fisherman  should 

^  Browning,  A  Death  in  the  Desert. 

-  John  xviii.  15,  "  went  in  with  Jesus." 

^  The  Yirgin  Mary  was  a  kinswoman  of  Elizabeth,  who  was  the  wife  of 
a  leading  priest ;  and,  therefore,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  through  their 
mother,  must  have  had  some  priestly  connexions. 

*  Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  24-,  quoting  Polycrates. 

J 


130  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

have  known  anything  personally  of  these  wealthy 
Sadducean  aristocrats,  with  whom  he  had  not  a  single 
thought  or  a  single  sympathy  in  common.  To  me 
it  seems  probable  that  he  knew  Hanan  and  his  house- 
hold only  in  the  way  of  his  business,  and  I  see  in  this 
incidental  notice  a  fresh  confirmation  of  my  conjecture 
that  the  duties  of  this  business  obliged  him  sometimes 
to  reside  at  Jerusalem. 

And  thus  the  beloved  disciple  stayed  with  Christ 
during  the  long  hours  of  that  night  of  shame  and 
agony.  He  was  doubtless  an  eye-witness  of  all  that  he 
narrates  respecting  Peter's  denial,  and  the  scenes  which 
took  place  before  Annas,  Caiaphas,  and  Pilate.  He  saw 
Jesus — with  the  murderer  by  His  side — standing  on  the 
pavement,  wearing  the  crown  of  thorns,  and  the  purple 
robe,  dyed  a  deeper  purple  with  His  blood.  He  heard 
the  Jews  prefer  to  Him  Barabbas  as  their  favourite, 
and  Tiberius  as  their  king.  He  heard  the  bursts  of 
involuntary  pity  and  involuntary  admiration  which 
wrung  from  the  half-Christianised  conscience  of  the 
cruel  governor  the  exclamations,  "  Behold  the  man  !  " 
"  Behold  your  king  !  "  He  saw  Him  bear  His  cross 
to  Golgotha ;  and  saw  Him  crucified  ;  and  saw  the  two 
brigands  occupying  the  places  for  which  he  and  James 
had  asked  so  ignorantly,  at  His  right  hand  and  at  His 
left. 

Four  women  stood  beside  those  crosses.  They  were 
the  mother  of  Jesus ;  Salome,  His  mother's  sister ; 
Mary,  the  wife  of  Clopas,  perhaps  another  sister ;  and 
Mary  of  Magdala.  With  them,  alone  apparentl}'  of 
all  the  Apostles,  stood  St.  John.  No  other  disciple, 
except  standing  in  a  group  afar  off,  was  present  during 
those    awfully    agonising,    those     supremely    crushing 


BESIDE   THE    CROSS.  131 

moments  wliicli  seemed  to  dash  into  indistinguishable 
ruin  all  their  hopes,  and  to  give  an  almost  fiendish 
significance  to  the  taunts  of  priests  and  mob.  Let  us 
recognise  the  heroism,  the  fiiith,  the  endurance  which 
enabled  the  three  Maries,  and  Salome,  and  her  son,  to 
stand  gazing  at  a  scene  which  must  have  made  the 
sword  pierce  their  souls  with  unutterable  agony.  Let 
us  see  in  it  the  proof  that  if  Salome  and  John  had 
indeed  looked  to  share  with  Him  a  pre-eminence  of 
blessedness,  they  were  not  ashamed  to  stand  beside 
Him  in  the  hour  of  His  humiliation,  and  in  the  Valley 
of  the  Shadow  of  His  Death. 

And  even  in  His  hour  of  agony.  His  kingly  eye 
was  on  them.  To  them  were  addressed  the  second, 
perhaps  the  first  words  which  He  uttered  after  the  actual 
elevation  of  His  cross.^  "  Seeing  then  His  mother 
and  the  disciple  standing  by,  whom  He  loved.  He  said 
to  His  mother  '  Woman,  behold  thy  son  !  '  Then  He 
saith  to  the  disciple,  '  Behold  thy  mother  ! '  "  Very  few 
words,  but  there  was  compressed  into  them  a  whole 
world  of  meanino-  and  of  tenderness  !  And  what  can 
appear  less  strange  than  that  to  St.  John  was  en- 
trusted that  precious  charge  ?  True  that  Christ  had 
"brethren;"  but  apparently  they  were  not  there;  or, 
if  they  were  there,  it  was  only  among  "  the  many  "  who 
stood  "  beholding  from  afar  " — the  many  whose  love 
was  not  at  that  moment  strong  enough  to  overcome  the 

^  Tlie  prayer  for  His  murderers  seems  to  have  been  breathed  wlien  the 
hands  were  pierced,  and  before  the  cross  was  uplifted  (Luke  xxiii.  34). 
The  omission  by  B,  D,  etc.,  may  be  due  to  some  lectionary  arrangement, 
but  is  surely  insufficient  to  throw  doubt  on  its  genuineness,  since  it  is 
found  in  n,  A,  C,  F,  G,  etc.  "We  cannot  tell  whether  the  promise  to  the 
converted  i-obber  was  spoken  before  or  after  these  words  to  His  mother 
and  St.  Jolm. 

J  2 


132  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

horror  and  the  fear.  But  John  was  there — almost  His 
earliest  disciple ;  whom  He  loved  most ;  who  believed 
on  Him  unreservedly ;  who  was  akin  to  Him ;  whose 
mother  was  the  Virgin's  sister ;  who  was  rich  enough  to 
undertake  the  charge  ;  whose  natural  character,  at  once 
so  brave  and  so  loving,  fitted  him  for  it ;  who  had  power- 
ful friends ;  who  was  probably  the  only  Apostle  and 
the  only  relative  of  Jesus  who  had  a  home  at  Jerusalem, 
where,  in  the  bosom  of  the  infant  Church  which  Christ 
had  founded,  it  was  fitting  that  the  Virgin  should 
henceforth  dwell.  "And  from  that  hour  that  disciple 
took  her  into  his  own  home."  ^ 

"From  that  hour;" — he  felt  probably  that  the 
Virg-in  had  witnessed  as  much  as  human  nature  could 
sustain  of  that  awful  scene.  There  would  be  no  rescue; 
no  miracle.  Jesus  would  die — would  die,  as  He  had 
said,  upon  the  cross.  The  Virgin  had  suffered  enough 
of  agony  ;  she  had  received  her  last  farewell ;  it  needed 
not  that  she  should  witness  the  deepening  anguish, 
the  glazing  eye,  the  horrible  crurifragium  which  pro- 
bably awaited  Him.  The  Beloved  Disciple  took  her 
to   his  own   home. 

But  he  must  himself  have  returned  to  the  cross, 
for  he  tells  us  expressly  and  emphatically  that  he  was  a 
personal  eye-witness  of  the  last  scenes.  He  was  standing 
by  when  the  soldiers  broke  the  legs  of  the  two  robbers 
to  hasten  their  deaths,  which  otherwise  might  not  have 
happened  till  after  two  more  days  of  lingering  agony. 

^  The  ti-adition  to  which  tlio  Fatliers  refer  as  "  ecclesiastica  historia  '' 
(probably  derived  from  the  Acts  of  Leucius)  assign  another  reason. 
"  Cujus  privih'gii  sit  Joannes,  immo  Joannis  Virginitas  ;  a  domino  virgine 
mater  virgo  virgini  diseipnlo  commcndatur  "  ( Jcr.  c.  Jovin.  i.  26).  SyKov 
uTi  'iwdvvri  8ia  tV  trapdiviav  (Epiph.  Haer.  Ixxviii.  10 ;  Paulinus  of  Nola, 
Ep.  51,  &c.).     Sco  Zahn,  p.  206. 


THE   CLOSING   SCENES.  133 

He  was  close  by  the  cross  when,  seeing  that  Jesus  was 
already  dead,  a  soldier  gashed  His  side  "  with  the  broad 
head  of  his  lance,"  and  "  immediately  there  came  out 
blood  and  water  "^ — to  be  for  all  the  world  the  mystic 
signs  of  imparted  life  and  cleansing  power.  "  And  he 
that  hath  seen  hath  borne  witness,  and  his  witness  is 
true,  and  he  knoweth  that  he  saith  things  that  are 
true  that  ye  also  may  believe."  That  witness  was  to 
be  henceforth  the  work  of  his  life  ; — the  winning  over 
of  men  to  that  belief  was  to  be  henceforth  the  main 
end  of  all  he  did  and  all  he  wrote."  And  to  that 
incident,  narrated  by  him  alone  of  the  Evangelists, 
he  refers  with  special  emphasis  in  the  Epistle  which 
enshrines  his  final  legacy  to  the  Church  of  God. 

How  long  the  Apostle  stood  to  the  Virgin  in  the 
place  of  a  son  we  do  not  know.  She  is  mentioned  in 
the  New  Testament  but  once  again,  when  we  see  her 
united  in  prayer  and  supplication  with  the  other  holy 
women  and  the  Apostles,  and  with  the  "  brethren  of  the 
Lord,"  now  at  last  fully  converted  by  the  miracle  of  the 
Resurrection.  After  that  slight  notice  she  disappears 
not  only  from  Scripture  history,  but  from  early  tra- 
dition. It  was  unknown,  even  as  far  back  as  the  second 
century,  whether  she  died  in  Jerusalem,  where  the  tomb 
of  the  Virgin  is  now  shown,  close  to  Gethsemane ;  ^  or 
whether,  after  more  than  eleven  years  had  elapsed,  she 
accompanied  St.  John  to  Ephesus,  and  died  and  was 
buried  there.* 

^  John  xix.  34,  \6yxv  .  .  .  fw^ev.  ^  xix.  35 ;  xx.  30. 

^  This  supposed  tomb  was  uukuowu  for  at  least  six  centuries.  Nice- 
phonis,  in  the  fourteentli  century — from  whom  has  been  derived  such  a 
mass  of  entirely  untrustworthy  tradition — says  that  she  died  at  Jerusalem, 
aged  fifty-nine  (JET.  E.  ii.  3). 

*  Epiphan.  Haer.  Ixxviii.  11.     Tliis  was  asserted  in  a  .syuodical  letter 


134  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

The  subsequent  glimpses  which  we  obtain  of  St. 
John  in  Scripture  are  not  numerous.  He  does  not  once 
appear  alone,  but  always  in  conjunction  with  St.  Peter, 
and  for  twenty  years  and  more  he  does  not  seem  to  have 
manifested  any  independent  or  original  action.  On  the 
morning  of  the  Resurrection  he  was  with  St.  Peter, 
when  they  two  were  the  first  who  received  from  Mary 
of  Magdala  the  startling  tidings  that  the  tomb  was  open 
and  empty.  Instantl}^  they  ran  to  visit  it.  The  swift 
step  of  St.  John,  who  was  the  younger  of  the  two, 
outran  Peter ;  and  as  he  stood  stooping  and  peering 
into  the  darkness  he  saw  that  Jesus  was  not  there,  and 
caught  only  the  white  gleam  of  the  linen  clothes.  But 
when  Peter  came  to  the  place  no  awe,  no  danger  of 
Levitical  pollution,  could  restrain  his  impetuous  eager- 
ness. He  would  see  all,  know  all.  Instantly  he  plunged 
into  the  dim  interior,  and  stood  gazing  on  the  scene 
which  presented  itself.^  The  shroud  which  had  swathed 
the  body  lay  there  ;  the  napkin  lay  rolled  up  in  a  place 
by  itself.  As  they  went  home  together,  the  Divine 
necessity  that  Jesus  should  rise  from  the  dead  dawned 
first  with  full  conviction  upon  their  minds. 

Once  more  we  see  St.  John  separately  and  as  a  dis- 
tinct figure  in  his  own  Grospel.  He  was  with  the  Eleven 
on  that  first  Easter  evening  when  Jesus  appeared  to  them 
in  the  closed  upper  room,  and  said,  "  Peace  be  with 
you,"  and  showed  them  His  hands  and  His  feet,  and 
breathed  on  them,  and  said,  "  Receive  ye  the  Holy 
Ghost."     He  was  with  the   Twelve  when  Jesus  again 

of  the  Council  of  Ephesus,   A.D.   431.     It   seems,  however,  to   be   veiy 
unlikely,  for  had  she  died  at  Ephesus  her  grave  would  have  beeu  eveu 
more  likely  to  bo  poiiit-ed  out  tliau  the  grave  of  John. 
'   John  XX.  6,  ilarjKdiv  .  .   .   dewpu. 


BY   THE   LAKE   OF   GALILEE.  135 

appeared  to  tliera  on  the  next  Sunday,  and  Thomas  was 
convinced.  Then  for  a  little  time  the  Appearances  of 
the  Risen  Lord  seem  to  have  been  intermitted.  Driven 
to  earn  his  daily  bread,  Peter  proposed  to  resume  the 
fishing,  w^hich  had  for  so  long  a  time  been  abandoned. 
Thomas  and  Nathaniel,  James  and  John,  and  two  other 
disciples,  accompanied  them.  They  toiled  all  night; 
but  they  caught  nothing.  But  when  day  began  to 
dawn,^  Jesus  stood  suddenly  upon  the  beach.  They, 
however,  did  not  recognise  Him  in  His  glorified  body,^ 
and  in  that  unexpected  place,  as  He  stood  with  His 
figure  looming  dimly  through  the  morning  mist.  He 
said  to  them,  "Children,  have  ye  anything  to  eat?" 
They  answered,  "  JSTo."  Then  He  bade  them  cast 
the  net  on  the  right  side  of  the  ship,  and  immediately 
they  were  not  able  to  drag  the  net  into  the  boat  for 
the  multitude  of  fishes.  The  meaning  of  the  sign 
fiashed  at  once  upon  the  soul  of  the  disciple  whom 
Jesus  loved.  He  said  to  Peter,  ''It  is  the  Lord!''' 
Instantly  Peter  had  snatched  up  his  fisher's  coat,  and 
plunged  into  the  sea  to  swim  to  land.  More  slowly  the 
rest  followed  in  the  little  boat,^  dragging  to  land  the  net 
full  of  one  hundred  and  fifty-three  fishes,  which  they 
were  unable  to  haul  into  their  ship.  When  they  got  to 
land  they  saw  there  a  charcoal  fire  with  a  fish  broiling 
on  it,  and  a  loaf  beside  it,  as  one  may  often  see 
now  when  the  poor  Fellah  in  are  fishing  in  the  Sea  of 
Galilee.  Jesus  bade  them  bring  some  of  their  fish, 
and  share  in  the  morning  meal.  They  dared  not  ask 
Him,  "Who  art  Thou  ?"  knowing  that  it  Avas  the  Lord. 
Jesus  brought  them  the  bread  and  the  loaf,  and  they 

^  Jobu  xxi.  4,  yiuofxei/rjs.  ~  John  xx.  1-i ;  Luke  xxiv.  31. 

•'   XXI.  8,  nAoiapicji. 


136  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

broke  their  fast.  Then,  after  the  meal,  there  took 
place  that  deeply  touching  interview  in  which  Jesus 
bade  the  now-forgiven  and  deeply-repentant  Peter  to 
feed  His  little  lambs,  and  to  feed  and  tend  His  sheep,^ 
and  prophesied  to  him  the  martyr-death  that  he  should 
die.  Peter,  as  he  turned  awa}^  caught  sight  of  John, 
who  was  following  them,  and  with  sudden  curiosit}^ 
asked,  "Lord,  but  this  man — what  ?"^  "  If  I  will  him 
to  abide  while  I  am  coming,^  what  is  it  to  thee? 
Follow  thou  Me."  The  expression  was  misunderstood, 
as  those  of  the  Lord  so  often  were.  It  led  to  the 
mistaken  notion  among  the  brethren  that  that  disciple 
was  not  to  die.  It  is  to  remove  that  erroneous  im- 
pression that  he  relates  the  incident.  It  is  clear  from 
his  language  that  he  did  not  even  then,  in  extreme  old 
age,  understand  its  complete  significance,  because  Christ 
had  never  revealed  the  secrets  about  the  time  and 
manner  of  His  coming.  But  his  correct  version  of  the 
misquoted  words  did  not  prevent  the  continuance  of 
the  error.  Even  when  he  was  dead,  legend  continued 
to  assert  that  he  was  living  in  the  grave,  and  that  his 
breath  gently  heaved  the  dust.^ 

'   xxi.  15,  j8o<rK€  TO  apvla  ixov;    16,   irolfj.aive  ;    17,   06(rKf  to.  Trpoffara  fxov. 

-  xxi.  21.     Kvptf,  ovros  Se  tI  ;  Vulg.  Doniine,  hie  autem  quid  I 

^  See  Canon  Westcott's  note  on  this  expiwssion  (Spea'ker''s  Comm. 
ad  loc). 

*  St.  Augustine  [in  Joh.  cxxiv.  2)  seems  to  have  been  half  iuelined  to 
accept  this  strange  and  unmeaning  legend  on  the  testimony  of  grave 
people  who  imagined  themselves  to  have  witnessed  it ! 


CHAPTER    XXV. 

LIFE    OF    ST.    JOHN    AFTER   THE    ASCENSION. 

"  JEterna  sapieutia  sese  in  omuibus  rebus  maxime  iu  humana  mente, 
omuium  maxime  in  Christo  Jesu  manifestabit." — Spinoza,  Ep.  xxi. 

After  this  St.  John  is  jnentioned  but  thrice,  and  alluded 
to  but  once  in  the  New  Testament. 

i.  He  is  enumerated  among  the  eleven  Apostles  who 
were  gathered  in  the  UjDper  Room  with  the  rest  of  the 
little  company  of  believers  after  the  Ascension,  and  who 
were  constantly  engaged  in  prayer  and  supplication.^ 

ii.  He  was  going  up  with  Peter  to  worship  in  the 
Temple  at  three  o'clock  in  the  afternoon — one  of  the 
stated  hours  of  prayer — when  Peter  healed  the  lame 
man,  and  afterwards  addressed  the  assembled  worship- 
pers, whose  amazement  had  been  kindled  by  that  act 
of  power.  This  great  address — in  which,  as  we  infer 
from  Acts  iv.  1,  St.  John  took  some  part — was  inter- 
rupted by  the  sudden  arrest  of  the  Apostles.  They 
were  seized  in  the  sacred  precincts  by  the  dominant 
Sadducees — the  priests  and  the  captain  of  the  Temple. 
As  it  was  now  evening  the  two  Apostles  were  thrown 
into  prison.  Next  morning  they  were  haled  before  the 
Sanhedrin  which  gathered  for  then-  trial  in  the  impos- 
ing numbers  of  all  its  three  constituent  committees. 
The  accused,  according  to  the  usual  custom,  were  set 

1  Acts  i.  13. 


138  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

in  tlie  midst  of  tlie  semicircle  and  sternly  interrogated. 
The  two  Apostles — Peter  again  being  the  chief  spokes- 
man— gave  a  bold  and  noble  testimony,  from  which  the 
Sanhedrists  recognised  the  two  facts  that  "  they  had 
been  with  Jesus,"  and  that  they  were  simple  and  un- 
lettered persons.  The  Pharisees  from  the  \vhole 
height  of  their  ignorance  looked  down  on  them  as 
"  no  theologians."  Their  Galilean  dialect,  and  their 
obvious  unacquaintance  Avith  Pabbinic  learning,  in- 
clined the  Sanhedrin  to  despise  them.  On  the  other 
hand,  they  were  perplexed  by  tlie  presence  and  witness 
of  the  lame  man  who  had  undeniably  been  healed. 
They  therefore  remanded  the  Apostles  while  they  held 
a  discussion  among  themselves.  In  spite  of  the  severity 
ibr  which  the  Sadducees  were  notorious,  they  did  not 
feel  justified  on  this  occasion  in  doing  anything  more 
than  threatening  them  with  worse  consequences  if  they 
ventured  to  preach  again  in  the  name  of  Jesus.  The 
Apostles  gave  them  frank  warning  that  such  threats 
must  be  in  vain,  since  it  was  a  plain  duty  to  obey 
God  rather  than  man.  Afraid,  however,  of  exciting  a 
tumult  among  the  people  who,  up  to  this  time,  sided 
heartily  with  the  Christians,  and  were  glorif3dng  God 
for  the  recent  miracle,  the  Sanhedrin  were  forced  to 
content  themselves  with  renewing  their  threats,  and 
they  set  the  Apostles  free. 

The  return  of  Peter  and  John  to  the  assembled 
brethren  was  followed  by  a  song  of  triumphant  glad- 
ness, and  by  another  outpouring  of  spiritual  influences. 
During  these  earlier  scenes  of  Christian  history  there 
is  no  doubt  that  St.  John  lived  mainly  at  Jerusalem — 
though  he  may  have  made  short  excursions  to  places 
in  Palestine.     He  must  have  lived  through  the  short 


THE   APOSTLES   SCOURGED.  139 

period  daring  which  the  Cliurch  adopted  the  experiment 
of  community  of  goods ;  must  have  heard  of,  or 
witnessed,  the  terrible  fate  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira ; 
and  must  have  shared  in  the  outburst  of  supernatural 
power,  followed  by  multitudes  of  conversions,  which 
marked  the  early  energy  of  St.  Peter.  He  was 
arrested  with  the  other  Apostles  in  a  fresh  alarm  of 
the  priestly  party,  and  thrust  into  the  public  prison. 
Having  been  delivered  in  the  night  by  an  angel,  at  the 
dawn  of  the  next  day  they  were  once  more  led  before 
the  startled  Sanhedrin.  This  time  they  were  arrested 
without  violence,  for  the  priests  feared  a  violent  inter- 
vention of  the  people  on  their  behalf.  Stung,  however, 
to  madness  by  the  firm  attitude  of  the  Apostles,  who, 
to  the  remonstrances  of  the  High  Priest,  answered 
by  their  spokesman  St.  Peter  that  they  were  bound 
to  refuse  obedience  to  the  murderers  of  their  Lord, 
the  Sanhedrin  seriously  debated  whether  they  should 
put  them  all  to  death,  and  were  only  saved  by  the  wise 
counsel  of  Gamaliel  from  the  commission  of  that  fatal 
crime.  They  determined,  however,  to  scourge  the 
Apostles ;  and  then  first  St.  John  knew  what  it  was  to 
suffer  disgrace  and  bodily  anguish  for  his  Lord.  But 
that  anguish  failed  of  its  intended  purpose.  The 
Apostles  rejoiced  that  they  were  deemed  worthy  to 
suffer  shame  for  His  name,  and  daily  in  the  Temple 
preached  the  good  news  of  Jesus  Christ. 

iii.  Then  followed  the  appointment  of  the  Seven  ;  the 
preaching  and  martyrdom  of  St.  Stephen;  the  scattering 
of  all  the  Church  except  the  Apostles,  in  consequence 
of  the  fierce  persecution  of  Saul  the  Pharisee ;  the  work 
of  Philip  in  Samaria ;  the  journey  of  St.  Peter  and  St. 
John  to  confirm  the  new  converts,  and  the  stern  en- 


140  THE    EARLY   DATS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

counter  with  Simon  Magus. ^  After  this  the  two  friends 
travelled  through  Samaria,  preaching  in  many  of  the 
villages.  Perhaps  En  Gannim  was  one  of  those  villages, 
and  by  that  time  St.  John  had  learnt  the  meaning  of 
the  rebuke  "  Ye  know  not — ye — of  what  spirit  ye  are." 
He  saw  then  why  Jesus  had  rebuked  the  evil  wish  to 
call  down  fire  from  heaven  and  consume  them  all. 
Then,  too,  he  learnt  what  Jesus  meant  when  He  had 
said  to  them  by  the  well  of  Jacob,  "Lift  up  your  eyes 
and  gaze  on  the  fields,  because  they  are  white  unto 
harvest  already.  .  .  I  sent  you  to  reap  that  wherein 
ye  have  not  toiled.  Others  have  toiled,  and  3'e  have 
entered  into  their  toil."  " 

iv.  After  this  the  name  of  St.  John  disappears 
entirely  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  We  cannot 
tell  what  view  he  took  at  first  of  the  bold  conduct 
of  Peter  in  admitting  to  baptism  a  Gentile  soldier  and 
his  household — in  "  going  in  to  men  uncircumcised  and 
eating  with  them."  We  can  only  feel  sure  that  Peter's 
conviction  would — in  the  close  union  which  had  ever 
subsisted  between  them — have  gone  far  to  help  his  own. 
By  the  time  when  he  wrote  the  Apocalypse  he  had 
learned  to  look  upon  the  Gentiles  as  true  and  equal 
members  of  the  Church  of  God.^ 

It  was  four  or  five  j^ears  after  the  conversion  of 
Cornelius*  that  Herod  Agrippa  I.  seized  James,  the 
elder  brother  of  John,  and  put  him  to  death  with  the 
sword.     We  are  told  so  little  of  St.  James,  the  son  of 

^  Acts  viii.  14. 

-  Johu  iv.  35 — 38. 

'  On  tlio  much  disputiHl  quostion  whether  in  tlio  Apocalypse  tlie 
Gentiles  are  placed  on  a  footing  of  absolute  equality  with  the  Jews,  sco 
Gebhardt,  Doctrine  of  the  Apocahjpse,  pp.  180 — 194. 

*  A.D.  44. 


MARTYRDOM   OF  JAMES.  141 

Zebedee,  that  we  do  not  know  by  what  bold  deed  or 
burning  word  he  had  provoked  his  doom.  We  may 
judge  with  what  mingled  feelings  of  anguish  and 
exultation  St.  John  would  witness  or  hear  of  the 
murder  of  the  elder  brother  with  whom  he  had  spent 
his  life.  St.  James  was  the  first  martyr  of  the  Apostles. 
How  vast  were  to  be  the  changes  in  the  Church  and  in 
the  world  during  the  long  half  century  before  John 
passed  away  to  join  his  brother — the  last  survivor  of 
that  high  and  glorious  band !  But,  doubtless,  he  was 
in  some  measure  prepared  for  this  lengthening  of  his 
life.  In  that  memorable  scene  on  the  misty  lake  at 
early  morning  Jesus  had  spoken  to  Peter  of  martyrdom  ; 
to  John  He  had  spoken  only  of  tarrying  while  He  was 
coming.  It  is  as  though  He  had  said,  "  Let  finished 
action  follow  Me,  shaped  by  the  example  of  My  pas- 
sion ;  but  let  contemplation,  now  commenced,  abide 
until  I  come,  to  be  perfected  when  I  have  come."^  "  The 
one  Apostle,"  says  Canon  Westcott,  "is  the  minister  of 
action,  whose  service  is  consummated  by  the  martyrdom 
of  death ;  the  other  is  the  minister  of  thought  and 
teaching,  whose  service  is  perfected  in  the  martyrdom 
of  life." 

V.  The  name  of  St.  John  occurs  but  once  in  the 
thirteen  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  Perhaps  in  the  early 
years  of  St.  Paul's  stormy  ministry  the  two  would  not 
have  been  naturally  drawn  together.  They  would  be 
separated  in  part  by  the  memories  of  "  the  great  per- 
secution," ^  of  which  Saul  had  been  the  most  furious 
agent,  and  in  which  John  may  have  lost  many  friends. 
They  would  be  still  more  separated  by  deeply-seated 
differences  of  character.     St.  John,  as  we  have  said,  was 

'  Aug.  in  Joh.  cxxiv.  3.  ^  Acts  viii.  1,  ^.tyas  Stuyuos. 


142  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

wholly  unlike  the  effeminate  pietist  of  Titian's  or  of 
Raphael's  pictures.  We  have  seen  that  there  was 
within  him  a  spring  of  most  fiery  vehemence.  Yet,  so 
far  as  we  can  judge,  this  passion  was  not  often  or  easily 
aroused.  None  could  have  written  as  St.  John  wrote 
who  had  not  thought  long  and  deeply ;  and  the  slight 
part  which  he  is  recorded  to  have  taken  in  the 
history  of  the  Church  during  the  first  twenty-five  years 
of  its  existence  shows  that  he  was  either  absorbed  in 
the  care  of  the  Virgin,  or  that  he  was  living  a 
life  of  meditation  and  devotion.  This  was  almost 
necessitated  by  the  atmosphere  of  persecution  w^hich 
was  continuously  breathed  by  the  Church  of  Jerusalem. 
But  St.  John  must  have  been  naturally  inclined  to  a 
(juiet  and  contemplative  life.  Men  of  very  opposite 
temperaments  are  not  readily  drawn  together,  and 
there  must  have  been  much  in  the  almost  feverish 
energy  of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  wdiich  would  not 
at  once  win  the  sympathies  of  the  beloved  disciple. 
Besides  this,  the  glimpse  which  we  are  allowed  to  see 
of  John  shows  him  still  devoted  to  the  outward  life  of 
the  Jewish  system.  He  was  a  daily  worshipper  in  the 
•Temple  at  the  stated  hours  of  prayer,  and  remembered 
even  to  his  last  days — though  with  ever -widening 
vision  and  ever-deepening  insight  into  the  meaning  of 
the  words — that  "salvation  was  from  the  Jews."  One, 
therefore,  who  loved  peace  as  he  loved  it — one  who 
could  only  be  prepared  by  the  training  of  experience 
for  the  immense  development  which  the  Church  was 
to  undergo  from  its  earlier  conditions  in  the  days  of 
Gralilee — one  who  as  a  mystic  lived  in  the  absorbing 
realisation  of  a  Divine  idea— w^ould  hold  aloof  from 
the  loud  questions  which  began  to  agitate  the  Church, 


ST.   JOHN  AND   ST.   PAUL.  143 

and  almost  unconsciously  would  feel  inclined  to  slirink 
from  liim  wlio  stirred  them  up.  It  is  easy  to  conceive 
that  to  one  trained  as  John  had  been  in  the  intensest 
feelings  of  nationality,  and  in  the  most  absolute  devotion 
to  the  Law,  the  characteristics  of  St.  Paul  were  not  at- 
tractive. Paul's  breadth  and  cosmopolitanism,  his  eman- 
cipation from  Judaic  prejudices,  his  vehement  dialectics, 
his  irresistible  personality,  his  daring  expressions,  the 
independence  of  his  course  of  action,  the  bitter  feelings 
which  he  kindled  in  the  hearts  of  men  amongf  whom 
John  lived,  and  whom  he  could  not  but  respect — all 
tended  to  prevent  any  close  union  between  the  two. 
When  Saul  first  returned  from  Damascus  an  ardent  and 
controversial  convert,  St.  John  seems  to  have  been  absent 
from  Jerusalem.^  At  any  rate,  St,  Paul  did  not  see 
him,  either  on  that  occasion  or  on  his  subsequent  visit 
to  convey  to  the  elders  the  alms  of  the  Gentiles  at 
Antioch.  But  on  the  occasion  of  the  third  visit  of 
St.  Paul  to  Jerusalem  with  Barnabas,  in  order  to 
settle  the  question — so  momentous  to  the  future  of 
the  Church — whether  or  not  the  yoke  of  circumcision, 
and  therewith  of  all  Levitism,  was  to  be  laid  on  the 
necks  of  the  Gentiles — St.  Paul  tells  us  that  St.  John 
was  at  Jerusalem  as  one  of  the  Three  Pillar- Apostles, 
and  that  he  met  him  in  conference.  I  have  elsewhere 
described  that  most  important  scene  in  the  history  of 
the  world.  St.  John  was  at  that  time  by  conviction  a 
fervid  Jewish  Christian.  He  was  living:  with  and  actino- 
with  the  Jewish  Christians,  side  by  side  with  St.  Peter, 
who  at  Jerusalem  conformed  to  all  their  usasres.  Both 
of  them — though  all  three  "  were  held  to  be  pillars  " — 
were  overshadowed  by  the   commanding  personality  of 

1  Gal.  i.  19. 


144  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

the  Lord's  brother,  St.  James,  the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem. 
Between  the  first  reception  of  the  delegates  from  Antioch 
and  the  stormy  meeting  in  which  the  question  was  de- 
bated, St.  Paul,  with  the  consummate  statesmanship 
which  was  one  of  his  intellectual  gifts,  liad  privately 
secured  the  assent  of  the  three  leaders  of  the  Church  to 
his  views  and  proposals.  All  three  were  convinced ;  all 
three  gave  to  him  and  Barnabas  the  right  hands  of 
fellowship  ;  all  three  recognised  their  mission  to  the  Gen- 
tiles. Nay,  they  not  only  recognised  this  mission,  but 
formally  handed  it  over  to  the  care  of  those  who  had 
hitherto  been  its  all  but  exclusive  ministers.  They 
made  to  Paul  and  Barnabas  but  two  requests — both  most 
readily  granted  :  the  one  that  they  should  themselves  be 
left  undisturbed  in  the  ministry  of  the  circumcision ;  the 
other  that  the  needs  of  the  poor  saints  at  Jerusalem 
should  not  be  overlooked  in  the  wealthier  churches  of 
the  Gentiles.  The  fact  of  this  mutual  recognition — 
this  interchange  of  Christian  pledges  in  a  spirit  of 
friendship — is  the  best  answer  to  the  dreams  of  those 
who  would  persuade  us  that  St.  John,  in  the  Apocalypse, 
condescended  to  attack  St.  Paul  himself,  as  well  as  his 
followers,  in  language  of  unmitigated  hate. 

This  seems  to  have  been  the  only  occasion — at  any 
rate,  it  is  the  only  one  known  to  us — on  which  there 
was  any  meeting  between  the  Beloved  Disciple  and  the 
Apostle  of  the  Gentiles.  St.  John  took  no  part  in  the 
great  debate.  He  seems  to  have  shrunk  from  everything 
which  bore  any  resemblance  to  noisy  publicity.  On  this 
occasion  he  left  the  speaking  to  St.  Peter  and  St.  James, 
only  supporting  their  concession  by  his  vote  and  silent 
acquiescence.  His  was  not  the  temperament  which 
delights,  as  did  that  of  St.  Paul,  in  ruhng  the  stormy 


TRAINING   OF   ST.   JOHN.  145 

elements  of  popular  assemblies.  In  the  earlier  days, 
when  he  and  Peter  worked  together  in  close  com- 
munion, it  is  Peter  who  on  every  occasion  comes 
forward  as  the  chief  speaker.  Yet  we  must  not  infer 
from  this  that  the  relation  of  John  to  the  elder  Apostle 
was  at  all  like  that  which  subsequently  arose  between 
Paul  and  Barnabas.  In  the  first  missionary  journey 
Paul  took  the  lead  by  virtue  of  his  superior  intellect 
and  more  vigorous  energy.  He  was,  in  human  esti- 
mate, the  abler  and  greater  of  the  two.  It  was  not  so 
with  St.  Peter.  His,  doubtless,  was  the  readier,  the 
more  practical,  the  more  oratorical  ability ;  but,  judging 
by  their  writings,  w^e  should  again  say  that  in  human 
estimate  St.  John's  was  the  profounder  and  more  gifted 
soul.  But  his  sphere  was  by  no  means  the  sphere  of 
daily  struggles  and  controversies — 

"  Greatest  souls 
Are  often  those  of  whom  the  noisy  world 
Hears  least." 

We  can  think  of  St.  John  in  the  cave  at  Patmos  ;  w^e 
cannot  fancy  him  addressing  a  yelling  mob  on  the  steps 
of  Castle  Antonia.  His  was  to  be  a  very  different,  yet 
a  no  less  necessary  work.  It  was  his  to  be  guided  by 
the  Spirit  through  the  education  of  outward  circum- 
stances to  truths  deeper,  richer,  more  comprehensive, 
more  final  than  it  had  been  granted  even  to  St.  Paul  to 
set  forth. 

From  this  time  we  lose  sight  of  St.  John  in  Holy 
Scripture,  so  far  as  any  external  record  or  notice  of  him 
is  concerned.  All  our  further  knowledge  respecting 
the  outward  incidents  of  his  life  is  reducible  to  the 
fact  that  when  he  wrote  the  Apocalypse  he  was  "  in  the 
k 


146  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

isle  that  is  called  Patmos,  because  of  the  word  of  God 
and  the  testimony  of  Jesus  Christ."  But,  meagre  as  is 
this  one  personal  fact,  we  learn  much  respecting  him 
from  early  tradition,  and  from  the  precious  legacy  of  his 
own  writings.  From  these  sources  we  are  able  to  trace 
the  Apostle  in  his  advance  towards  Christian  perfection 
— in  the  expansion  of  his  enlightened  intellect,  in  the 
deepening  of  his  imi versa!  love. 

It  will  be  better  to  separate  the  story  of  his  remain- 
ing years  as  it  is  handed  down  to  us  by  early  tradition, 
from  the  proofs  furnished  by  his  own  writings  of  his 
gradual  growth  in  the  wisdom  and  knowledge  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Yet  tradition  helps  us  to  realise  the 
conditions  under  which  the  beautiful  but  partial  dawn 
which  we  witness  on  the  banks  of  Jordan  and  the  shores 
of  Galilee  broadened  at  last  into  the  perfect  day. 

Many  details  of  his  history  are  left  in  the  deepest 
obscurity.  During  a  period  of  at  least  eighteen  years 
we  neither  know  where  he  lived  nor  what  he  did.  In 
the  New  Testament  we  lose  sight  of  him  in  a.d.  50,  at 
the  date  of  the  Synod  of  Jerusalem ;  we  do  not  meet 
with  him  again  till  we  find  him  in  the  isle  called 
Patmos,  in  a.d.  68. 

Perhaps  some  readers  may  feel  surprise  that  the 
latter  date  should  be  given  with  any  confidence.  It 
was  the  general  belief  of  antiquity  that  his  residence  in 
Patmos  was  owing  to  his  banishment.  Even  this  has 
been  disputed  on  the  ground  that  it  is  only  an  inference 
from  his  expression  that  he  was  there  "  because  of  the 
word  of  God  and  because  of  the  testimony  of  Jesus 
Christ."  These  words  have  been  interpreted  by  some 
to  mean  that  he  retired  from  Ephesus  to  the  seclu- 
sion  of  the    rock}^  islet   in    order   to    concentrate   his 


ST.  JOHN   AT   PATMOS.  147 

mind  on  the  tliouglits  and  visions  wliicli  were  being 
revealed  to  him.  There  are,  however,  no  certain  grounds 
for  setting  aside  the  old  tradition.  It  furnishes  the 
most  natural  interpretation  of  his  language,  and  well 
accords  with  his  saying  that  he  was  "  the  companion  " 
of  those  to  whom  he  was  writing,  "  in  their  tribulation, 
and  in  the  kingdom  and  endurance  of  Jesus  Christ." 
But  the  date  of  this  banishment,  if  banishment  it  were, 
is  most  variously  conjectured.  Epiphanius^  says  that  it 
took  place  in  the  reign  of  Claudius ;  Theophylact  and 
the  superscription  of  a  Syrian  MS.  say  that  it  was  in 
the  reign  of  Nero.  Irenseus,^  Jerome,^  and  Sulpicius 
Severus*  agree  that  it  was  in  the  reign  of  Domitian,  and 
Eusebius  in  his  Chronicon  places  St.  John's  banishment 
in  the  fourteenth  year  of  that  reign  -^  Dorotheus  places  ^f 
it  in  the  reign  of  Trajan.  On  the  other  hand,  Clemens 
of  Alexandria^  and  Tertullian^  do  not  venture  to  name 
the  particular  emperor,  and  Origen^  observes  that  St. 
John  himself  is  silent  on  the  subject.  But — as  I  hope 
to  show  hereafter — there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
respecting  the  date  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  therefore 
none  as  to  St.  John's  stay  in  Patmos,  if,  as  I  myself 
believe,  he  was  the  author  of  that  book.  That  he  was  the 
author  is  the  all  but  unanimous  testimony  of  antiquity 
from  the  days  of  Justin  Martyr  to  those  of  the  great 
Fathers  of  the  third  century,  and  it  is,  I  believe,  the 
inference  to  which  the  book  itself  most  decisively  points. 
The  notion  that  it   was  written  either   by  John  the 

1  Saer.  li.  33.  ^  Iren.  c.  Haer.  v.  30,  3. 

3  Be  Virr.  Illustr.  9.  *  Sacr.  Hist.  ii.  31. 

^  H.  E.  iii.  18 ;  xx.  23 ;  and  Chron.     He  says  he  returned  from  exile 
in  the  reign  of  Trajan. 

*  Quls  div.  Salv.  42. C^  '77  •  :Z'3  -,,  ^  De  Praescr.  Eaer.  36. 

*  Comm.  in  Matt.  iii.  p.  719. 

k  2 


148  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF  CHRlSTIAIsITY. 

Presbyter,  or  by  the  Evangelist  John  Mark,^  requires 
for  its  support  far  weightier  and  more  decisive  evidence 
than  any  which  modern  ingenuity  has  even  attempted 
to  provide. 

Of  this  hiatus  of  eighteen  years  in  the  life  of 
the  great  Apostle  tradition  has  very  little  to  tell  us, 
and  what  it  does  tell  us  is  of  no  value.  That  he  left 
Jerusalem  is  certain,  and  he  probably  left  it  for  ever. 
This  ma}/  have  been  at  the  end  of  the  twelve  years 
during  which,  as  tradition  says,  Jesus  had  bidden  His 
Apostles  to  stay  in  the  Holy  City  r  but,  more  pro- 
bably, it  was  at  a  much  later  period.  What  were 
the  circumstances  which  induced  him  to  leave  his 
own  home,  ^  we  cannot  tell,  but  it  may  have  been 
the  result  of  that  terrible  combat  between  Romish 
oppression  and  Jewish  exasperation  which  arose  during 
the  Procuratorships  of  Albinus  and  Gessius  Florus.  We 
have  seen  that  the  agitation  which  affected  the  minds 
even  of  Christian  Jews  had  given  occasion  to  the 
warnings  of  the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem  that  "  a  man's 
wrath  worketh  not  the  righteousness  of  God."  The 
death  of  the  Virgin,''  the  murder  of  "  the  Lord's  brother  " 
— perhaps  precipitated  by  his  own  stern  rebukes — the 
meditated  flight  of  the  Christians  to  Pella — the  actual 
outbreak  of  the  Jewish  war,  any  of  these  may  have  been 
St.  John's  motive  for  thus  changing  the  settled  habits 

1  Boza,  Prolegg.  in  Apoc. ;  Hitzig,  Ueber  Joh.  IlarJcus,  1843. 

'  ApoUouius,  ap.  Euscb.  JI.  E.  v.  18  •  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi.  5, 
quoting  from  the  Praedicatio  Petri. 

■■'  Th  tSta,  John  xix.  27. 

*  Nicepboriis,  H.  E.  ii.  42.  There  is  notliing  to  be  said  for  the  con- 
jecture of  Buronius  and  Tillomont  that  the  Virgin  accompanied  St.  John 
to    Asia.       ovZafxav     \eyeTai     Sti    eTnr]ydyfTO     fxed'  eavTOv    r^v    aylav     napBtvoy 

(Epiphan.  Haer.  Ixxviii.  §  11).  This  statement  was  made  at  the  Council 
of  Ephesus  (Labbe,  Condi,  iii.  547). 


HE  LEAVES   JERUSALEM.  149 

of  his  life.  Perhaps  by  this  time,  when  a  race  of 
young  men  was  growing  up  around  him  to  whom  the 
Crucifixion  was  but  a  tale  which  they  heard  from  the 
lips  of  their  fathers,  he  may  have  been  led  to  the 
conviction  that  the  day  of  Jerusalem  had  passed  away 
for  ever,  that  Jewish  obduracy  had  finally  hardened 
itself  against  the  message  of  the  Grospel.  Any  peace 
which  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  had  enjoyed  had  been 
owing  to  the  famines,  and  political  troubles,  which  had 
diverted  the  attention  of  the  Jews  from  the  Christians 
to  the  desperate  struggle  against  the  encroachments  of 
the  Romans  and  their  Herodian  nominees.  Perhaps 
it  had  been  due,  to  an  even  greater  degree,  to  the 
legal  "  righteousness "  of  St.  James,  his  faithfulness 
to  all  Jewish  traditions,  his  conciliatory  and  respectful 
attitude  towards  the  Mosaic  Law.  But  the  death  of 
James  seemed  to  open  a  new  chapter  in  the  history 
of  the  Mother  Church.  Simon,  son  of  Alphseus,  an- 
other kinsman  of  Christ  according  to  the  flesh,  was 
chosen  to  succeed  him.  St.  John  may  have  felt 
that  his  work  at  Jerusalem  was  now  finished ;  that 
his  thoughts  had  ripened  ;  that  his  labours  were 
needed  in  wider  regions  of  the  mission  field.  Of  this 
we  are  sure — that  he  would  leave  himself  to  be  guided 
in  all  the  main  decisions  of  his  life  by  the  influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  of  God.^ 

^  He  may  even  have  stayed  iu  Jerusalem  till  Nero  sent  Vespasian  to 
suppress  the  Jewish  revolt  (Luke  xxi.  20 ;  Jos.  B.  J.  ii.  25  ;  Euseb.  iii.  5 ). 
One  tradition  says  that  on  leaving  Jerusalem  he  went  and  preached  to 
the  Parthians.  It  rests  on  such  very  shadowy  foundation  tliat  it  may 
safely  be  set  aside  (see  Lampe,  p.  48,  and  supra,  p.  114).  Even  if  there 
were  not  some  strange  eri'or  in  St.  Augustine's  reference  to  his  Epistle 
as  being  written  "  to  the  Parthians  "'  {Qiiaest.  Evang.  ii.  19),  his  writing  to 
tliem  would  not  proA^e  that  he  had  preached  among  them,  and  there  is  no 
trace  that  he  did. 


150  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Two  common  legends  account  for  his  presence  in 
Patmos  by  a  supernatural  deliverance  from  martyrdom. 
It  is  said  that  he  was  plunged  into  a  caldron  full  of 
boiling  oil  at  the  Latin  gate  of  Home,  and  so  far  from 
suffering,  only  came  out  of  the  caldron  more  vigorous 
aud  3'outhful  than  before.^  Another  story,  frequently 
represented  in  Christian  art,  says  that  an  attempt  was 
made  to  kill  him  by  a  poisoned  chalice,  but  that  "  it 
was  rendered  harmless  when  he  signed  over  it  the  sign 
of  the  cross,  and  the  poison  fled  from  it  in  the  form 
of  a  little  asp."^  The  silence  of  Irenaeus,  Hippolytus, 
Eusebius,  Chrysostom,  Sulpicius  Severus,  and  many 
others  is  alone  sufficient  to  prove  that  these  are  un- 
authorised fables. 

But  these  legends  bring  us  face  to  face  with  the 
question,  Was  St.  John  ever  at  Rome  ?  It  is  true  that 
the  legends  furnish  no  conclusive  evidence,  and  that 
there  is  no  authentic  trace  of  St.  John's  visit  to  Rome 
in  the  history  of  the  Roman  Church.^  On  the  other 
hand,  there  is  throughout  the  Apocalypse  so  intensely 

'  Tert.  de  Praescr.  Haer.  36,  "  iu  oleum  ignewm  demersiis,  nihil  passiis 
est."  Jer.  adv.  Jovin.  i.  26,  and  in  Matt.  xx.  23 ;  Origen,  in  Matt.,  Horn. 
12.  Baroiiius  says  truly  enough  of  Tertulliaii  that  he  was  so  credulous 
that  he  would  snatch  up  any  old  woman's  storj'  with  avidity  [Annal. 
A.D.  201).  On  these  two  legends  see  the  various  references  in  Zahn,  Acta 
Joannis,  cxvii. — cxxii. 

^  Augustine,  l^oliloq. ;  Isidor.  Hispalensis,  De  Vit.  et  Mort.  Sanct.  73; 
Ps.  Abdias,  Hist.  Apost.  v.  20  (Fabric.  Cod.  Apocr.  ii.  575) ;  Cave,  Lives  of 
the  Apostles.  Papias  tells  the  same  stoiy  of  Joses  Barsabbas,  aud  it  may 
be  allegorically  deduced  from  Mark  xvi.  18. 

^  It  is  curious  that  in  the  Latin  translation  of  the  Journeys  of  the 
Divine  {■ir(pi6Sot)  hj  the  Pseudo-Prochorus  (Bibl.  Patr.  1677),  an  attempt 
is  made  to  fix  his  martyrdom  at  Rome.  The  MS.  was  found  in  tlie 
library  of  tho  monastery  of  St.  Christodulus  in  Patmos.  See  Zahn,  Acta 
Joannis,  p.  191.  Tiseheudorf,  Act.  Apocr.  266 — 271.  Hipjiolytus  exclaims 
"Tell  me,  blessed  John,  what  didst  thou  see  aud  hear  about  Babylon?" 
De  Christ,  et  Antichrist.  36. 


WAS   HE   EVER  AT   ROME?  151 

vivid  a  realisation  of  the  horrors  of  the  Neronian 
persecution,  and  the  wickedness  of  the  agents  by  which 
it  was  brought  about,  that  we  feel  strongly  inclined 
to  believe  that  the  visions  of  that  book  reflect  the 
terrible  experiences  of  an  eye-witness.  St.  John  may 
have  reached  Rome  as  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  did, 
either  as  an  Evangelist  or  as  a  prisoner,  during 
the  final  spasms  of  that  dreadful  movement  which 
first  caused  the  blood  of  martyrdom  to  flow  in  rivers. 
In  any  case  the  Apocalypse  is  the  echo  of  a  harp 
whose  perturbed  strings  have  been  smitten  by  fierce 
and  bloodstained  hands,  and  then  have  been  swept 
by  the  mighty  wind  of  inspiration.  St.  John  did 
not  indeed  perish  as  did  his  brother  Apostles  dur- 
ing those  years  of  horror,  but  the  legends  of  the 
poison-cup  and  the  boiling  oil  may  be  dim  reflections 
of  the  narrowness  of  the  escape  which  ended  in 
what  was  (perhaps  erroneously)  believed  to  be  his 
deportation  to  a  rocky  island,  and  his  condemnation 
to  toil  as  a  labourer  in  its  quarries.^ 

We  must,  however,  be  content  to  remain  in  igno- 
rance as  to  the  causes  of  his  presence  in  Patmos. 
The  tone  of  his  letter  to  the  Seven  Churches  speaks 
of  an  intimate  knowledge  of  their  circumstances, 
and  the  possession  of  an  unquestioned  authority 
over  them.  He  must  have  resided  in  Asia  Minor 
before  we  find  him  at  Patmos,  and  the  attempt  to 
prove  that  his  connection  with  Ephesus  is  apocryphal 
must  be  pronounced  to  have  egregiously  failed.  That 
attempt,  first  made  by  Liitzelberger,  in  1840,  has  been 

^  Victoriniis  and  Primasius  say  that  he  was  "in  metallum  damnatus." 
There  are  no  mines  in  Patmos,  bnt  metalhivi  may  mean  "a  stone-quarry." 
It  was  not  one  of  the  islands  usually  selected  for  deportations. 


152  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

seriously  followed  up  by  Keim,  in  1867/  and  by  the 
Dutch  theologian  Scholten,  in  1871,^  but  it  surely 
shows  "  the  very  intemperance  of  negation."  Not  only 
Baur,  and  Strauss,  and  Renan,  but  even  the  most 
advanced  followers  of  the  Tubingen  school — such  as 
Schwegler,  Zeller,  and  Volkmar — admitted  the  cogency 
of  the  evidence  for  a  fact  which  till  the  last  ten  years 
has  been  universally  accepted.  The  notion  that  the 
Apostle  John  was  mistaken  for  the  Presbyter  John — 
if  ever  there  was  such  a  person — is  wholly  baseless. 
Even  if  we  accept  the  wild  conjecture  that  the  Apoca- 
lypse is  by  John  Mark  the  Evangelist,  or  by  the 
supposed  Presbyter  John — conjectures  which  crumble 
to  nothino"  before  the  first  serious  examination — it  re- 
suits  from  the  whole  manner  and  phraseology  of  the 
book  that  the  writer  meant  himself  to  be  regarded  as 
the  Apostle.  And  such  being  the  case,  it  is  equally 
clear  that  his  residence  in  Asia  Minor  is  assumed  as 
a  thing  well  known  to  all  readers  of  the  book.  It 
would  have  been  absurd  for  a  forger  to  start  with  an 
assumption  which,  if  false,  would  at  once  have  proved 
that  he  was  not  the  person  whom  he  pretended  to  be. 
Even  if  we  set  aside  the  authority  of  such  men  as 
St.  Clemens  of  Alexandria,^  and  Origen,^  the  fact  that 
St.  Polycarp,  in  a.d.  160,^  who  had  actually  seen  and 
heard  the  Apostle,  appeals  to  his  authority  for  the 
Eastern  custom  of  keeping  Easter  on  Nisan  14,  ought 
alone  to  be  decisive.     Polycrates,  in  a.d.   190,  who  as 

^  Koira,  Jesu  von  Nazara,  i.  161 — 167 ;  iii.  44 — 45. 
'  Scholteu,  Der  Apost.  Joann.  in  Klein-Azie  (Leydeu). 
'*  Clom.  Alex.  Quis  Div.  Salv.  §  42,  aud  ap.  Eusob.  iii.  23. 
*  Orig.  in  Gen.  (Euseb.  iii.  1,  1). 

^  Tert.  De  Praescr.  Haer.  32 ;  Jer.  De  Virr.  Illustr.  17  ;   Chron.  Pasch. 
p.  252.     Waddingtou  places  the  martyrdom  of  Polycarp  iu  154  or  155. 


ST.  JOHN  AT  EPHESUS.  153 

Bishop  of  Epliesus  was  a  man  likely  to  be  well  in- 
formed, made  the  same  appeal/  as  also  did  St.  Irenaius 
in  his  letter  to  Florinus.^  When  we  remember  the 
statement  of  St.  Irenseus  that  as  a  boy  (about  a.d. 
150)  he  had  heard  from  the  mouth  of  Poly  carp,  Bishop 
of  Smyrna,  and  many  other  elders,  many  memorable 
things  about  John,  the  Lord's  disciple,  who,  as  a 
successor  to  St.  Paul,  lived  in  Epliesus,  wrote  the 
Revelation  and  the  Gosj)el,  and  died  at  a  great  age  in 
the  reign  of  Trajan,^ — does  it  not  require  an  extraor- 
dinary stretch  of  credulity  to  suppose  that  he  made  a 
confusion  between  John  the  Bosom-friend  of  the  Lord, 
the  beloved  Apostle  and  Evangelist,  the  immortal 
survivor  of  the  Apostolic  choir,  and  a  "  nebulous 
presbyter,"  whose  very  existence  is  problematical  ? 
And  who  can  believe  that  when  Polycrates  ranks 
John  with  the  Aj)ostle  Philip  as  "  the  two  great  stars 
of  Asia,"*  he  is  thinking  only  of  this  dubious  presbyter? 
Eusebius  does  indeed  in  one  place  (iii.  39)  infer  from 
a  well-known  passage  that  Papias  had  been  a  personal 
hearer  of  Aristion  and  John  the  Presbyter,  and  not  of 
John  the  Apostle.  In  the  style  of  Papias,  so  inartihcial 
and  inexact,  it  cannot  be  regarded  as  certain  that  this 
is  his  meaning ;  but  even  if  it  is,  the  inference  drawn 
from  this,  that  St.  John  had  not  lived  in  Asia,  has  no 
weight  against  the  clear  statements  of  Polycarp  and 
Irenaius.  It  has  never  been  doubted  that  Cerinthus 
taught  in  Asia,  and  from  the  first  the  Church  has,  in 

1  Af.  Euseb.  V.  18,  24.     Coiup.  Ilaer.  III.  iii.  4). 

■■^  Euseb.  V.  20,  24. 

•^  Surely  this  testimony  more  thau  outweiglis  the  mere  sileiice  of 
Ignatius  [ad  Eph.  12  ;  ad  Trail.  5). 

^  Ap.  Euseb.  H.-B.  iii.  31.  I  believe,  with  Reuan,  that  the  Piiilip 
iutended  was  the  Apostle  nut  the  Deacou. 


154  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

many  ways,  connected  the  names  of  Cerinthus  and  St. 
John.  By  a  strange  fatality  the  writings  of  St.  John 
were  actually  attributed  to  Cerinthus  {againnt  whom 
they  were  perhaps  written)  by  the  Alogi,  who  denied 
the  doctrine  of  the  Logos. ^  A  scholar  so  accomplished 
as  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  in  expressing  his  doubts 
about  the  Apocalypse,  thinks  it  worth  while  to  record  the 
legend  that  Cerinthus  had  written  it,  and  fraudulently 
prefixed  to  it  the  name  of  John.^  But  even  if  it  should 
be  proved  that  the  Apocalypse  was  not  written  by 
John,  it  still  bears  decisive  testimony  to  the  belief 
that  he  was  the  acknowledged  head  of  the  Christians  of 
Asia. 

Belegating  to  the  Excursus^  the  intricate  inquiry  as 
to  the  identity  of  the  Apostle  with  John  the  Presbyter, 
we  may  here  be  allowed  to  assume  that  the  belief  of  the 
Church — unquestioned  for  nineteen  centuries — is  still 
to  be  accepted.  It  is  not  difficult  to  discover  why 
St.  John  should  have  fixed  his  new  home  in  the 
famous  capital  of  Proconsular  Asia.  The  Church  in 
that  city  was  large  and  flourishing.  It  stood  at  the 
head  of  many  churches  of  great  importance.  The 
position  of  the  city  as  an  emporium  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean made  it  an  eminently  favourable  centre  for 
missionary  labours.  The  Christians  of  Asia  were  liable 
to  severe  temptations,  and  had  long  been  tried  by  the 
influx  of  various  errors.  Everything  called  for  the 
presence  of  St.  John.  St.  Paul  was  imprisoned,  if 
not    dead,  and    had,   at    any   rate,    bidden    farewell    to 

^  Epiphan.  Jlaer.  li.  3.  Tlio  otlier  Fathers  aro  unanimous — Chrys. 
Fraef.  in  Eplies.  ;  Tlicod.  Mops,  rrooem.  in  Cat.  Fair.  ;  Tert.  c.  Marc. 
iv.  5.  2  ^p  Euseb.  iii.  28. 

3  See  Excursus  XIY.  "St.  John  iu  Epliosus." 


WORK  OF  ST.  JOHN.  155 

Epliesus  for  ever/  The  other  Apostles  were  scattered 
or  dead.  The  Church,  largely  composed  of  Judaising 
Christians,  naturally  looked  for  the  support  of  an 
Apostle  from  Jerusalem.  St.  John  was  alone  avail- 
able for  the  work ;  nor  is  it  impossible  that  he  may 
have  felt  all  the  more  need  to  obey  the  call  because, 
like  St.  James,  he  may  have  been  aware  of  the  danger 
which  arose  from  the  perversion  of  St.  Paul's  teaching 
by  Gnostic  and  Antinomian  heresiarchs,  who  were  ever 
mixing  it  up  with  alien  elements  borrowed  from  Creek 
or  Eastern  speculation. 

That  St.  John's  individual  leanings  long  continued 
to  be  in  favour  of  the  Judaists  is  proved  by  the  im- 
pression which  he  left  upon  the  minds  of  those  with 
whom  he  had  lived ~ ;  as  well  as  by  the  countenance  he 
gave  to  the  Quartodecimans,  who  kept  the  Passover  on 
the  14th  of  Nisan.  It  is  proved  most  of  all  by  the 
general  tone  of  the  Apocalypse,  which,  amid  many 
resemblances,  differs  so  widely  from  that  of  the  Gospel 
and  Epistles.  That  the  Apocalypse  was  written  many 
years  before  the  Gospel  and  Epistles,  ought  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  certain  conclusion.  The  difference  of  style 
alone — apart  from  the  deeper  differences  on  which  I 
shall  dwell  hereafter — is  sufficient  to  prove  it.  The 
Greek  of  the  Gospels  and  Epistles,  though  Hebraic 
in  the  structure  of  its  sentences,  is  yet  perfectly  smooth 


»  Acts  XX.  25,  38. 

*  E.g.,  by  the  story  that  he  was  a  priest  (lepevs)  wearing  the  liigh- 
priestly  mitre,  Ex.  xxviii.  36  (Polyer.  ap.  Euseb.  v.  24).  But  it  must  be 
l)oriie  in  mind  that  St.  Jolm  regarded  all  Chi-istians  not  only  as  priests, 
but  as  high  priests  (i.  6 ;  xx.  6  ;  and  ii.  17,  where  the  mystic  stone  seems 
to  be  analogous  to  the  Urini  and  Tliimimim  which  were  put  inside  the 
ephod).  The  word  "  mitre  of  the  faith  "  is  used  metaphorically  in  Test. 
XII.  FaU:  iii.  8. 


156  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY- 

and  correct.  It  is  the  Greek  of  one  who  had  long 
been  familiar  with  the  language.  But  the  Greek  of 
tlie  Apocalypse  is  so  un grammatical  and  so  full  of  sole- 
cisms as  to  be  the  worst  in  the  entire  Greek  Testament. 
Now  it  is  natural  that  St.  John,  after  so  many  years 
in  which  he  had  spoken  little  but  Aramaic,  should 
write  Greek  imperfectly ;  and  that  he  should  subse- 
quently gain  power  in  writing  Greek  by  residence  in 
heathen  cities  and  among  a  Greek-speaking  population. 
But  it  is  inconceivable  that  he  should  have  written  the 
Gospel  and  Epistles  in  pure  Greek,  and  then,  after 
years  of  familiar  jDractice,  should  have  come  to  write 
the  language  incomparably  worse.  The  attempts  to 
explain  the  difference  of  style  by  the  peculiarities  of 
Apocalyptic  writings  are  impossible  after -thoughts, 
wholly  inadequate  to  account  for  the  phenomena.  But 
besides  this,  without  the  invention  of  a  moral  miracle, 
we  cannot  regard  it  as  possible  that,  by  writing  the 
Apocalypse  after  the  Gospel,  St.  John  could  have 
gone  back  from  clear  thought  to  figures,  and  have 
reduced  the  full  expression  of  truth  to  its  rudimentary 
indications.^ 

Perhaps  it  needed  nothing  less  than  the  fall  of 
Jerusalem  to  teach  to  St.  John,  as  it  taught  to  most 
Jewish  Christians,  that  though  Judaism  had  been  the 
cradle  of  Christianity  it  was  not  to  be  its  grave.  Their 
intense  belief  in  the  symbolism  of  the  Mosaic  worship, 
their  identification  of  faithfulness  and  orthodoxy  with 
obedience  to  the  Levitic  law,  were  opinions  so  in- 
veterate that  nothing  could  shake  them  save  that 
visible  interposition  which,  when  Christianity  was  fairly 
planted  in  the  world,  rendered  iwpossihle  the  fulfilment 

'  Ou  this  subject  see  Canon  Westcott,  Introd.  to  Gofjjel,  p.  Ixxxvi. 


THE  APOCALYPSE.  157 

of  Mosaic  ordinances.  The  extreme  Judaisers  had  so 
long"  encouraged  themselves  in  the  belief  that  St.  Paul 
was  a  dangerous,  if  not  a  wicked,  teacher,  that  they 
could  not  be  convinced  that  after  all  they  had  been 
immeasurably  inferior  to  him  in  insight,  until  their 
eyes  were  opened  by  the  catastrophe  which  closed  the 
order  of  the  old  ag^es,  and  which  was  the  First  Comino- 
of  Christ.  St.  John  of  course  would  not  have  agreed 
with  these  Judaisers  in  their  extreme  views,  but  no 
one  can  read  his  Grospel  and  Epistles,  written  some 
time  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  without  see- 
ing how  much  his  knowledge  of  the  truth  had  been 
widened  since  he  wrote  the  Apocalypse  in  the  days 
when  the  Holy  City  had  not  as  yet  been  made  a 
heap  of  stones. 

It  has  been  said,  and  with  scarcely  any  exaggera- 
tion, that  the  Apocalypse  is  of  all  the  books  in  the  New 
Testament  the  most  intensely  Jewish,  and  the  Fourth 
Gospel  the  least  so.  In  the  Apocalypse  "  Jew  "  is  a 
term  of  the  highest  honour ;  in  the  Gospel  it  usually 
describes  the  enemies  of  Jesus,  the  Pharisees  and 
Priests.  Yet  these  differences  are  capable  of  explana- 
tion, and  we  must  remember  that  they  are  found  in 
connexion  with  close  resemblances.  Even  in  the  Gos- 
pel there  is  no  higher  eulogy  than  "  an  Israelite 
indeed,  in  whom  is  no  guile." 

We  must  be  content  to  remain  in  uncertainty  as 
to  the  chronology  of  this  part  of  St.  John's  life,  and 
as  to  the  circumstances  which  took  him  to  Ephesus.^ 

^  A  legend  preserved  by  the  author  of  the  Life  of  Timotheus,  of  whicli 
some  extracts  are  furnished  by  Photius,  says  that  he  was  shipwrecked  ou 
the  coast  of  Ephesus  during  the  Neronian  persecution.  It  is  also  men- 
tioned by  Simeon  Metaphrastes,  Vit.  Joh.  2  (Lampe,  Proleg.  p.  46). 


158  THE    EARLr   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

We  may,  however,  be  sure  that  his  residence  alike  in 
the  rocky  islet  and  in  the  thronged  Ionian  capital  were 
very  fruitful  in  his  divine  education.  In  Ephesus  he 
saw — perhaps  for  the  first  time — the  wicked  glittering 
life  of  a  great  Gentile  city,  with  its  merchandise  not 
only  of  fine  linen,  and  purple  and  scarlet,  and  vessels 
of  ivory  and  precious  wood,  and  amomum,  and  incense, 
and  wine,  and  horses,  and  chariots, — but  also  of  "slaves, 
and  souls  of  men.''  There,  on  the  centre  of  the  western 
coast  of  Asia  Minor,  he  could  as  from  a  beacon-tower 
look  back  over  the  plains  and  vallej^s  watered  by  the 
Hermus  and  Mseander,  and  while  he  kept  watch  over 
all  the  Churches  of  Asia,  his  voice  could  sound  like  a 
trumpet  of  God  over  the  Isles  of  Greece,  and  westward 
to  the  great  cities  of  Greece  and  Italy,  and  Gaul  and 
Spain.^  Amid  that  busy  scene,  with  its  harbour 
thronged  with  the  sails  of  the  civilised  world,  and  its 
Temple  frequented  by  nations  of  worshippers,  there 
could  have  been  little  time  for  contemplation  in  the 
midst  of  the  work  which  life  in  such  a  city  entailed 
upon  a  Christian  Apostle.  But  in  his  retirement  at 
Patmos,  whether  voluntar}'-  or  compulsory,  he  would 
have  leisure  for  peaceful  thought.  Patmos,  with  its 
strangely  shattered  configuration,  is  little  more  than  a 
huge  rock,  and  it  can  never  have  had  many  inhabitants, 
In  its  grotto  of  La  Scala,  on  its  bare  hills,  by  its  pro- 
jecting promontories,  as  he  sat  alone — with  man  distant 
from  him,  but  God  near — he  could  meditate  in  undis- 
turbed devotion.  He  might  naturally  pass  into  mystic 
ecstacy,  as  he  sat  under  some  grey  olive  and  looked 
up  in  prayer  to  the  glow  of  heaven,  or  gazed  on  the 

*  Magdeb.   Eccl.    Ilist.    Cent.   ii.    2 ;    see   too   Clirysost.    Horn.   i.    in 
Johan. 


PATMOS.  159 

silent  expanse  of  the  sea,  which  under  the  burning- 
sun  gleams  so  often  like  a  sea  of  glass  mingled  with 
lire.  No  outward  circumstances  could  have  been  more 
providentially  ordered  to  bring  out  his  noblest  faculties 
than  the  interchange  of  a  life  spent  "  amid  the  madding 
crowd's  ignoble  strife,"  with  one  spent  in  seclusion  and 
solitude,  wherein  he  could  commune  with  his  own 
thoughts  and  hear  the  voice  of  God  speaking  to  him, 
and  be  still. ^ 

The  history  of  Patmos  itself  throws  no  light  on 
this  interesting  subject.  It  is  scarcely  alluded  to  by 
any  ancient  author,  which  is  the  more  surprising  be- 
cause it  furnished  a  convenient  point  at  which  vessels 
could  touch  on  their  way  from  Ephesus  to  Italy.  It 
is  only  mentioned  incidentally  by  Pliny  and  Strabo,^ 
and  there  seem  to  be  no  adequate  grounds  for  Kenan's 
assertion  that  in  the  first  century  it  was  very  populous. 
A  sterile  rock,  about  eighteen  miles  in  circumference,"  can 
never  have  been  important.  We  have  no  mention  of  its 
being  used  for  the  deportation  of  criminals,  and  when 

1  "  Patmos  ressemble  a  toutes  les  lies  cle  I'Arcliipel :  mer  d'aziu",  air 
limpide,  ciel  serein,  rocliers  aux  sommets  deuteles,  a  peiue  revetus  par 
moments  d'uu  leger  duvet  de  verdure.  L'aspect  est  nu  et  sterile ;  mais 
les  formes  et  la  couleur  du  roe,  le  bleu  vif  de  la  mer,  sillonnee  de 
beaux  oiseaux  blancs,  oppose  aux  teints  rougeatres  des  rocliers  sout 
quelque  cliose  d'admir^ble "  (Renan,  V Anteclirist,  p.  376).  "Silent  lay 
the  little  island  before  me  in  the  morning  twilight.  Here  and  there  an 
olive  breaks  the  monotony  of  the  rocky  waste.  The  sea  was  still  as  the 
grave.  Patmos  reposed  in  it  like  a  dead  saint.  .  .  .  John — that  is  the 
thought  of  the  island.  The  island  belongs  to  Mm ;  it  is  his  sanctuary. 
The  stones  speak  of  him,  and  in  every  heart  he  lives  "  (Tischendorf,  Reise 
til's  Morgenland,  ii.  257  ;  see  too  Ross,  Reisen  auf  griech.  Inseln,  ii.  123, 
and  Guerin,  Descr.  cle  Vile  de  Pattnos,  1856).  It  consists  of  three  masses 
of  rock  united  by  narrow  isthmuses. 

2  Strabo,  X.  p.  488 ;  PUny,  H.  N.  iv.  12 ;  Thuc.  iii.  23. 

^  Tournefort,  Voy.  du  Levant,  i.  168.  In  his  time  there  were  only 
300  inhabitants.     See  on  Patmos,  Stanley's  Sermons  in  the  East,  p.  230. 


160  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

St.  Jolm  says  that  he  was  there  "for  the  word  of  God 
and  the  testimony  of  Jesus,"  the  phrase  is  indecisive. 
Patmos  w^as,  indeed,  so  completely  in  the  higluvay  of 
the  Icarian  sea,  and  its  port  was  so  convenient,  that 
it  would  not,  under  ordinary  circumstances,  have  suited 
the  object  for  which  islands  were  selected  as  places 
of  exile.  It  is  curious  that  the  pseudo-Prochorus  in 
his  Periodoi  says  nothing  about  any  banishment  to 
Patmos,  and  does  not  even  mention  the  Apocalypse, 
but  says  that  St.  John  went  there  to  write  his  Grospel. 
We  can  trace  no  special  influences  of  the  scenery  on 
his  mind,  unless  it  be  in  the  mention  of  "  a  burning 
mountain  in  the  midst  of  the  sea,"  which  may  be  a 
reminiscence  of  the  then  active  volcano  of  Santorin, 
the    ancient   Thera.^ 

»  Pliny,  n.  N.  iv.  12,  §  23 ;  Sen.  Qu.  Nat.  ii.  26 ;  vi.  21.  But  it  is 
just  as  easy  to  suppose  that  St.  John  may  have  sailed  past  Stromboli  in 
going  to  Rome. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

LEGENDS      OF      ST.      JOHN. 

Af(  56  Kol  Trapa56aeL  xP'jcSat.  ov  yap  tzclvtol  airh  Tijs  Oeias  ypa<pris  Svuarai  \afi- 
0a;/e(r0oi.— Epiphan.  Haer.  Ixi.  1. 

No  account  of  St.  John  would  be  complete  without 
some  estimate  of  the  many  legends  which  cluster  round 
his  later  years.  We  may  say  at  once  that  some  of 
them,  if  true  at  all,  belong — in  spirit  at  any  rate — far 
more  to  the  epoch  in  which  he  wrote  the  Apocalypse 
than  to  that  in  which  he  wrote  the  Gospel. 

1 .  One  of  the  best-known  of  these  tells  us  that  once 
at  Ephesus  he  was  entering  into  one  of  the  great 
public  baths  (thermae),  when  he  was  informed  that 
Cerinthus  was  in  the  building.  Thereupon  he  in- 
stantly turned  away,  exclaiming,  "  Let  us  fly,  that  the 
therma?  fall  not  on  our  heads,  since  Cerinthus,  the 
enemy  of  the  truth,  is  therein."^  In  another  version  of 
the  anecdote,  given  by  Epiphanius,  the  name  of  the 
mythical  Ebion^  is  substituted  for  that  of  Cerinthus, 
and  this  variation  happily  serves  to  throw  great  doubt 
on  a  story  which  is  still  quoted  with  applause  by 
religious  partisans,  because  it  is  supposed  to  furnish  a 
sanction  for  violent  religious  animosities.  We  catch, 
indeed,  in  this  story  the  old  tone  of  the  passion  and 

1  Iren.  c.  Haer.  iii.  3 ;  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  28 ;  iv.  14 ;  Tlieodoret,  ii.  3 ; 
Nicephorus,  iii.  30.  Besides  the  original  authorities  here  quoted,  I  may 
refer  to  Lampe  (Proleg.  68),  Kreukel  [Der  Apostel  Johannes,  pp.  21 — 32), 
and  Stanley  {Sermons  on  the  Apostolic  Age). 

^  Epiphan.  Haer.  xxx.  24. 

/ 


162  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

intolerance  of  the  Son  of  Thunder,  at  a  period  of  his 
life  when  we  might  have  hoped,  from  other  indications, 
that  he  had  climbed  to  that  region  "  where  above  these 
voices  there  is  peace."  Cerinthus  was  a  Jewish  Chris- 
tian, and  the  earliest  of  the  Christian  Gnostics.  He 
was  one  of  those  who  believed  in  two  principles,  making 
a  distinction  between  God  and  the  Demiurgus  or  Creator.^ 
Further  than  this,  he  was  one  of  the  founders  of  Doce- 
tism,  in  that  form  of  it  which  spoke  of"  Jesus  "  as  being 
a  mere  man,  on  whom  "  Christ,"  the  Son  of  the  Most 
High  God,  had  descended  at  His  baptism  in  the  form  of 
a  dove,  leaving  Him  again  at  the  moment  of  His  cruci- 
fixion. We  can  understand  how  abhorrent  such  views 
would  be  to  St.  John  ;  how  they  would  run  counter  to 
his  inmost  and  most  precious  convictions.  But  in  the 
idly  superstitious  notion  that  the  thermae  must  there- 
fore necessarily  fall  and  crush  the  heretic,  we  could  only 
trace  (were  the  story  true)  the  spirit  which  had  once 
wished  to  perform  Elijah-miracles  of  fire — the  spirit  of 
one  who  forgot  for  the  moment  that  Christ  came  to 
save,  not  to  destroy  —  that  God  maketh  His  sun  to 
shine  upon  the  evil  and  upon  the  good,  and  sendeth 
His  rain  upon  the  just  and  upon  the  unjust." 

^  Iron.  c.  Haer.  i.  25 ;  Hippol.  Philosoph.  vii.  33. 

^  "  A  mau,"  said  the  Rabbis,  "  should  not  wade  through  water,  or 
traverse  any  dangerous  place,  iu  company  with  an  apostate,  or  even  a 
wicked  Jew,  lest  he  bo  overtaken  in  the  same  ruin  with  him  "  [Kitzur 
Sh'lah,  f.  10,  h).  This  is  not  the  spirit  of  Eph.  v.  7,  or  Rev.  xrai.  4, 
which  forbids,  not  the  ordinary  intercourse  of  life,  which  St.  Paul  expressly 
told  his  converts  that  he  did  not  mean  to  forbid  (1  Cor.  v.  10),  but  partici- 
pation in  the  sins  of  others.     It  is  more  like  the  heathen  notion — 

"  Veta])o  qui  Cereris  sacrum 
Vulgarit  arcanum  sub  isdem 
Sit  trabibus,  fragilemve  mecum 
Solvat  phaselou,"  etc. 

By  entering   the  same  baths,  St.  John  would  certainly  not  have  been 


CERINTHUS    AND   THE    BATH.  163 

There  is  another  reason  for  hoping  that  this 
favourite  story  of  rehgious  hatred  is  a  fabrication. 
It  was  not  the  usual  custom  of  Jews  to  frequent  the 
pubhc  baths.  They  could  hardly  do  so  without  ren- 
dering themselves  liable  to  the  grossest  insults. 
Further,  the  baths  were  almost  invariably  adorned 
with  statues,  and  it  would  have  been  strange  indeed 
if  those  statues  were  not  sometimes  those  of  heathen 
deities.  The  iconoclasm  of  the  Jew  made  such  places 
detestable  to  him,  and  it  was  thought  an  instance  of 
reprehensible  laxity  when  the  younger  Gamaliel  entered 
a  bath  which  contained  one  of  the  common  statues  of 
Aphrodite.^  Then,  too,  the  Ionian  baths  were  thought 
to  be  very  luxurious.  We  are  told  that  for  this  reason 
they  were  never  used  by  St.  James.^  Epiphanius  also 
asserts  that  St.  John  "used  neither  bath  nor  oil."" 
Cerinthus  was  surely  not  worse  than  thousands  of  bad 
Christians  and  worse  Pagans — Pagans  dyed  in  every 
extreme  of  vice — whom  St.  John  would  be  quite  sure  to 
encounter  if  he  went  to  public  baths  at  all.  Strange 
to  say — heretical  as  were  the  speculations  of  Cerinthus 
— he  is  actually  asserted  by  one  ancient  writer  to  have 
been  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse.  That  conjecture 
is  absurd,  but  it  surely  shows  that  Cerinthus — who,  in 
virtue  of  his  restless  and  impressionable  nature,  has 
thus  become  "  the  spectre  of  St.  John  " — could  not  have 
been  so  flagrantly  wicked  as  to  render  it  dangerous  to  be 

supposed  by  any  human  being  to  make  himself  a  "partaker  of  the  evil 
deeds"  of  Cerinthus  (2  John  10,  11). 

'  Avoda  Zara,  f.  44,  b.  The  excuse  which  the  Rabbi  made,  "  that  the 
statue  was  a  mere  appendage  of  the  bath,"  showed  more  good  sense  than 
the  impetuous  conduct  ascribed  to  the  Apostle. 

^  Iren.  c.  Ilaer.  v.  33. 

^  Epiphan.  Haer.  Ixxviii.  14. 

/  2 


164  THE    EARLY  DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

under  the  same  roof  with  him  !  The  story  is  surrounded 
by  difficulties,  and  I  for  one  am  glad  to  dismiss  it  from 
m}'  memories  of  the  holy  Apostle,  as  an  anachronism  in 
the  history  of  his  life,  and  wholly  unworthy  of  the  later 
period  of  his  career.  If  there  be  any  truth  in  it,  it  can 
only  be  regarded  as  an  expiring  flash  of  that  old  in- 
tolerance which  Christ  had  reproved ;  or  again,  any 
slight  basis  of  truth  in  it  may  be  reducible  to  the 
utterance  of  a  strong  metaphor  by  way  of  exnressing 
marked  disapproval.^  In  tluit  case  the  Apostle  would 
not  have  meant  it  to  be  taken  literally  and  d'tin  trop 
grand  serieitx.  That  it  was  so  taken  is  due  to  Poly  carp — 
through  whom  we  get  the  story  third-hand  in  Irena?us 
— and  of  Epiphanius,  who  repeats  it  fourth  or  fifth- 
hand,  and  tells  it  wrongly.  Polycarp,  who  would  not 
notice  Marcion  in  the  streets,  and  when  challenged  as 
an  acquaintance  replied — not  surely  in  the  true  Chris- 
tian spirit,  which  is  peaceable  and  meek  and  gentle — 
"  Yes,  I  know  thee,  the  first-born  of  Satan ; "  Irenasus, 
who  tells  these  stories  with  approval ;  Epiphanius,  who 
spent  his  credulous  age  in  hunting  for  heresy  in  the 
dioceses  of  wiser  men  and  better  saints  than  himself 
— would  not  have  been  likely  to  soften  the  features 
of  an  anecdote  which   had  an  evil  effect  even  on  the 


^  Epipliauius,  though  glad  to  retaiu  the  story,  is  puzzled  liy  the  visit  to 
the  baths,  and  thinks  that  it  must  have  been  a  quite  unusual,  providential 
visit ;  that  he  must  have  gone  "  compelled  by  the  Holy  Spirit  "  {T)vayKo.ffdT) 
vnh  rod  aylov  Ui'evixaros),  to  give  him  au  opportunity  for  the  valuable 
anathema  !  Baronius  (Annal.  ad  A.D.  74)  thinks  to  reconcile  Epiphanius 
with  Ireuaeus  by  the  suggestion  that  perhaps  boih  Ceriuthus  and  E])iou  (!) 
miglithavo  been  in  the  bath,  a  conjecture  which  Ittigius  [DeHaeresiarchis, 
p.  58)  approves.  See  on  the  story  generally,  Lampe,  Froleg.  p.  69.  I  am 
sorry  that  Holtzmann  should  say  (Schenkel,  Bib.  Lex.,  s.  v.  Joh.  d.  Apost.) 
"  Dicso  Tradition  ist  von  alien  .  .  .  die  glaubwiirdigste,"  assigning 
as  his  reason  its  accordance  with  the  character  of  St.  John. 


STORY    ABOUT    THE    VINE.  166 

saintly  mind  of  John  Keble,  and  is  but  too  dear  to  the 
odium  ecclesiasticmn} 

2.  Another  curious  story  was  current  in  the  Churches 
of  Asia  long  after  the  Apostle's  death.  It  rests  upon 
the  authority  of  Papias,^  who  professes  to  have  heard  it 
from  Polycarp  and  others,  who  had  heard  it  from  St. 
John.  It  is  as  follows : — "  The  Elders  who  had  seen 
John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  related  that  they  heard 
from  him  how  the  Lord  used  to  teach  about  those  times, 
and  to  say,  '  The  days  will  come  in  which  vines  shall 
spring  up,  each  having  ten  thousand  stems,  and  on  each 
stem  ten  thousand  branches,  and  on  each  branch  ten 
thousand  shoots,  and  on  each  shoot  ten  thousand  clusters, 
and  on  each  cluster  ten  thousand  grapes,  and  each  grape 
when  pressed  shall  give  five-and-twenty  measures  of 
wine.  And  when  any  saint  shall  have  seized  one 
cluster,  another  shall  cry,  "  I  am  a  better  cluster,  take 
me  ;  through  me  bless  the  Lord." '  And  he  used  to 
add,  '  These  things  are  believable  to  believers.'  And 
when  Judas  the  traitor  did  not  believe,  and  asked, 
*  How  will  such  products  be  created  b}^  the  Lord  ?  '  the 
Lord  said,  '  They  shall  see  who  shall  come  to  those 
times.'  "^ 

^  Dean  Stanley  {Sermons  on  the  Apostolic  Age,  p.  273),  to  show  how 
stories  do  not  lose  by  repetition,  quotes  the  purely  imaginary  sequel  of 
the  story  in  Jeremy  Taylor  {Life  of  Christ,  xii.  2),  that  the  bath  did  fall 
down,  and  Cerintlms  was  crushed  in  the  ruins  !  Jeremy  Taylor,  however, 
was  not  the  inventor  of  this  story.  It  is  fii'st  found  in  the  Elenchus 
Haeresium,  by  Prateolus  ("  De  suo  addit  Prateolus,  etc.,  at  apiid  primi- 
tivae  ecclesiae  auctores  altumest  de  liac  re  silentum"  (Ittigius,  Haeresiarch. 
p.  58). 

^  On  Papias  see  the  Excursus  on  "  John  the  Presbyter." 
^  Iren.  Huer.  v.  33,  3. ;  Euseb.  U.  E.  iii.  ad  Jin. ;  Routh,  Eel.  Sacr.  p.  9. 
Grabe  rightly  observes  tliat  the  narrative  must  be   reckoned  among  tlie 
ix-jdiKtirepd.  Tiva  and  ^eVat  irapa^oAai,  which  Eusebius  charges  Papias  with 
recording. 


166  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

What  are  we  to  make  of  this  strange  story  ?  It 
comes  to  us  only  fifth-hand,  in  a  free  Latin  translation 
of  a  passage  of  Papias;  and  Papias,  on  whose  authority 
it  rests,  was  generally  looked  on  as  a  weak  and 
credulous  person.  To  make  it  still  more  suspicious, 
it  is  found  also  in  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch.  As  to 
its  right  to  belong  to  the  agrapha  dogmata,  or  unre- 
corded sayings  of  Christ,  two  suppositions  alone  are 
possible — either  that  it  rests  on  no  foundation,  or  that 
it  is  due  to  an  unintelligent  literalism  which  has  mis- 
taken some  bright  symbol  used  by  our  Lord  in  the  genial 
human  intercourse  of  His  happier  hours.  He  may 
have  been  speaking  with  His  Apostles  of  the  festal  an- 
ticipations which,  in  the  common  notions  of  the  people, 
were  mingled  with  their  Messianic  hopes ;  and  in 
touching  on  their  true  aspect — the  aspect  which,  for 
instance,  makes  the  wedding  festival  a  picture  of  the 
Lord's  kingdom — He  may  have  used  some  such  words 
in  the  half-playful  irony  which  marks  some  of  the  finer 
shades  of  His  familiar  language.  Perhaps  He  may 
only  have  meant  to  expose  the  carnal  notions  of  Jewish 
chiliasm,  which  appear  again  and  again  in  the  teaching 
of  the  Rabbis.  If  so,  St.  John — fond  at  that  time, 
as  the  Apocalypse  shows,  of  material  symbolism — 
may,  with  due  oral  explanation,  have  repeated  some 
of  His  words.  A  literal-minded  hearer  like  Polycarp 
may  have  repeated  the  tale  on  the  authority  of 
St.  John,  while  he  robbed  it  of  all  the  nuances  which 
alone  gave  it  any  beauty  or  significance.^  It  would 
become  still  more  prosaic  and  material  in  the  writings 

'  So  Eusebius  says  of  Papias  that  he  failed  to  understaiid  the  apostolic 
traditions  wllich  lie  received,  to  «V  inroSfiy/xacri  ir^iis  avruv  fxvdiKois  (lpri/ji.(va  fxti 
<Tvv((jn)aK6ra.  [II.  E.  iii.  39). 


IREN^US   AND   PAPIAS.  167 

of  a  commonplace  reporter,  and  the  last  traces  of  its 
real  bearing  might  easily  evaporate  in  the  loose  trans- 
lation and  paraphrase  of  Irenseus. 

In  this  point  of  view  the  story  has  a  real  value.  It 
shows  us  that  we  can  only  attach  a  modified  credence  to 
any  report  intrinsically  improbable,  even  when  it  comes 
to  us  attested  by  one  who  professes  to  have  known  at  least 
two  of  the  Disciples  of  the  Lord.^  If  the  anecdote  be 
based  upon  fact  at  all,  it  has  come  to  us  so  reflected  and 
refracted  through  the  medium  of  a  weak  mind  as  to  have 
lost  its  real  significance.  Experience  shows  that  a 
story  told  second-hand,  even  by  an  honest  narrator, 
may  be  so  tinged  in  the  narrator's  subjectivity  as  to 
convey  an  impression  positively  false.  We  are  thus 
obliged  to  discount  the  tales  and  remarks  for  which 
Irenseus  refers  us  to  the  authority  of  "the  Elders,"^ 
by  whom  he  seems  chiefly  to  mean  Papias  and  Polycarp. 
Now  Eusebius  does  not  hesitate  to  say  that  Papias 
was  a  source  of  error  to  Irenseus  and  others  who  relied 
on  his  "  antiquity."  When  Irenseus  says  that  the 
Pastor  of  Hermas  is  canonical ;  that  the  head  of  the 
Nicolaitans  was  the  Deacon  Nicolas ;  and  that  the  version 
of  the  LXX.  was  written  by  inspiration ; — we  know  what 
estimate  to  put  on  his  appeals  to  apostolic  tradition. 
But  there  is  one  instance  of  mistake  or  credulity  even 
more  flagrant.  The  whole  Christian  world  unites  in 
rejecting  the  assertion  that  our  Lord  was    fifty  years 

^  Namely,  Aristion  and  "  the  Presbyter  John."  Penan  needlessly 
conjectures  that  the  true  reading  of  Papias  in  this  passage  is  o  re  'ApiffTicnv 
Kal   6    trpffffivrepos  'l(tiduvris   oi   rov   Kvpiov    ixadrjTol    [/xa67)Tc!>i'^    Xiyovai    (Euseb. 

iii.  39). 

2  "  Audivi  a  quodam  Presbyter  o ;  qui  dam  ante  nos  dixit ;  virh  rov 
Kpelrrovos  rifxaiv  elprtTai,  etc.  See  his  forms  of  quotation,  collected  in  West- 
cott,  On  the  Canon,  p.  80. 


168  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

old  when  he  died,  although  Irenaeus  asserts  it  on  the 
authority  of  "  elders  who  received  it  from  the  Apostles."^ 
If  in  these  particulars  Irenaeus  followed  too  hastily  the 
credulous  Papias,  he  may  have  derived  the  harsher 
elements  of  the  story  about  Cerinthus  from  the  aged 
Polycarp.  The  accentuation  of  that  dubious  anec- 
dote is  what  we  should  expect  from  the  old  man 
whose  way  of  expressing  disapproval  of  heresy  was  not 
to  refute  it,  but  indignantly  to  stop  his  ears.  The 
description  of  the  passion  and  vehemence  of  Polycarp 
given  by  Irenaeus  in  his  fine  letter  to  Florinus  ex- 
actly resembles  the  conduct  attributed  to  St.  John. 
Irenaeus  says  that  if  Polycarp  had  heard  the  views  of 
Florinus,  "  I  can  testify  before  God  that  the  blessed 
and  apostolic  elder,  crying  out  loud,  and  stopping  his 
ears,  and  exclaiming  in  his  usual  fashion,  *  Oh,  good 
God,  to  what  times  hast  thou  kept  me  alive,  that  I 
endure  such  things ! '  tvould  have  fled  away  from  the 
place  in  ichich  he  had  been  sitting  or  standing  when  he 
had  heard  such  words."  Here  we  have  indeed  the 
story  of  St.  John  and  Cerinthus  in  all  its  distinctive 
features  !  But  how  ineffectual  and  how  little  Clu'ist-like 
is  such  a  method  of  meeting  error !  How  widely  does 
it  differ  from  the  calm  reasoning,  and  "  Ye  therefore  do 
greatly  err,"  of  the  Divine  Master  !  Neither  Papias  nor 
Irenaeus  are  safe  authorities  for  stories  like  these.  Papias 
has  evidently  fallen  into  some  confusion,  and  Irenaeus 
has  probably  mixed  up  his  reminiscences  of  Polycarp 
with  Polycarp's  reminiscences  of  St.  John.^ 

3.  Far  different  is  another  story  related  for  us  at 

1  See  for  these  opinions  Iren.  i.  26 ;  ii.  22 ;  iii.  21 ;  v.  20,  §  2. 

2  Euseb.  11.  E.  V.  20.     See  some  excellent  remarks  iu  Lampe's  Prole, 
gomena,  pp.  67 — 71. 


ST.   JOHN    AND    THE    ROBBER.  169 

full  length  by  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  and  worthy 
in  every  respect  of  the  great  Apostle.  We  may  assume 
that  it  rests  on  some  foundation,  because  it  is  full 
of  touches  which  could  not  easily  have  been  in- 
vented. It  shows  St.  John  to  us  in  the  full  tide  of 
his  apostolic  activity,  appointing  and  reproving  bishops, 
visiting  and  directing  Churches,  and  yet  finding  time 
to  care  for  individual  souls,  loving  the  young,  and 
willing  to  brave  any  danger  in  order  to  rescue  them 
from  temptation.  I  will  tell  it  mainly  in  the  words 
of  St,  Clemens  himself.^ 

"  But  that  you  may  be  still  more  confident,  when 
you  have  thus  truly  repented,  that  there  remaineth  for 
thee  a  trustworthy  hope  of  salvation,  hear  a  legend — 
nay,  not  a  legend  but  a  true  narrative — about  John  the 
Apostle,  handed  down  and  preserved  in  memory. 
When,  on  the  death  of  the  tyrant,  he  passed  over  to 
Ephesus  from  the  island  of  Patmos,  he  used  to  make 
missionary  journeys  also  to  neighbouring  Gentile  cities, 
in  some  places  to  appoint  bishoj)S,  and  in  some  to  set  in 
order  whole  Churches,  and  in  some  to  appoint  one  of 
those  indicated  by  the  Spirit.  On  his  arrival  then  at 
one  of  the  cities  at  no  great  distance,  of  which  some  even 
mention  the  name,  ....  he  saw  a  youth  of  stalwart 
frame  and  winning  countenance,  and  impetuous  spirit, 
and  said  to  the  bishop,  '  I  entrust  to  thee  this  youth 

^  Quis  Biv.  Salv.  c.  42.  Perhaps  the  life  of  Apostolic  joiirueyiugs,  of 
which  this  story  furnishes  a  trace,  may  show  that  even  if  Timotliy  was 
"  bishop  "  of  Ephesus  there  would  have  been  no  conflict  between  his  func- 
tions and  the  Apostolic  duties  of  St.  John.  But  we  do  not  know  whether 
Timothy  returned  to  Ephesus  or  not  after  the  visit  to  Rome,  wliich 
we  may  assume  that  he  made  at  the  urgent  summons  of  St.  Paul  (2  Tim. 
iv.  9).  The  notion  of  a  double  succession  of  bishops — of  the  circumcision 
and  of  the  uncircumcision — which  is  mentioned  in  the  Apostolic  Constitu- 
tions (vii.  16),  does  not  agree  with  the  indications  of  the  Apocalypse. 


170  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

with  all  earnestness,  calling  Christ  and  the  Church 
to  witness.'  The  bishop  accepted  the  trust,  and  made 
all  the  requisite  promises,  and  the  Apostle  renewed 
his  injunctions  and  adjuration.  He  then  returned  to 
Ephesus,  and  the  Elder  taking  home  with  him  the 
youth  who  had  been  entrusted  to  his  care,  maintained, 
cherished,  and  finall}^  baptised  hira.  After  this  he 
abandoned  further  care  and  protection  of  him,  con- 
sidering: that  he  had  affixed  to  him  the  seal  of  the 
Lord  as  a  perfect  amulet  against  evil.  Thus  pre- 
maturely neglected,  the  youth  was  corrupted  by  certain 
idle  companions  of  his  own  age,  who  were  familiar 
with  evil,  and  who  first  led  him  astray  by  many  costly 
banquets,  and  then  took  him  out  by  night  with  them 
to  share  in  their  felonious  proceedings,  finally  demanding 
his  co-operation  in  some  worse  crime.  First  familiarised 
with  guilt,  and  then,  from  the  force  of  his  character, 
starting  aside  from  the  straight  path  like  some  mighty 
steed  that  seizes  the  bit  between  its  teeth,  he  rushed 
towards  headlong  ruin,  and  utterly  abandoning  the 
Divine  salvation,  gathered  his  worst  comrades  around 
him,  and  became  a  most  violent,  bloodstained,  and  reck- 
less bandit-chief.  Not  long  afterwards  John  was  recalled 
to  the  city,  and  after  putting  other  things  in  order 
said,  '  Come  now,  0  bishop,  restore  to  me  the  deposit 
which  I  and  the  Saviour  entrusted  to  thee,  with  the 
witness  of  the  Church  over  which  thou  dost  preside.' 
At  first  the  bishop  in  his  alarm  mistook  the  meaning 
of  the  metaphor,  but  the  Apostle  said,  '  I  demand  back 
the  young  man  and  the  soul  of  the  brother.'  Then 
groaning  from  the  depth  of  his  heart  and  shedding 
tears,  '  He  is  dead,'  said  the  bishop.  *  How  and  by 
what   death  ?  '      '  He    is    dead   to    God !     For   he   has 


ST.   JOHN    AND    THE    ROBBER.  171 

turned  out  wicked  and  desperate,  and,  to  sum  up  all, 
a  brigand  ;  and  now,  instead  of  the  Church  he  has 
seized  the  mountain,  with  followers  like  himself.' 
Then  the  Apostle,  rending  his  robe  and  beating 
his  head,  with  loud  wailing,  said,  '  A  fine  guardian 
of  our  brother's  soul  did  I  leave  !  Give  me  a  horse 
and  a  guide.'  Instantly,  as  he  was,  he  rode  away 
from  the  Church,  and  arriving  at  the  brigands'  out- 
posts, was  captured  without  flight  or  resistance,  but 
crying,  '  For  this  I  have  come.  Lead  me  to  your 
chief.'  The  chief  awaited  him  in  his  armour,  but  when 
he  recognised  John  as  he  approached,  he  was  struck 
with  shame  and  turned  to  fly.  But  John  pursued  him 
as  fast  as  he  could,  forgetful  of  his  age,  crying  out, 
*  Why,  my  son,  dost  thou  fly  from  thine  own  father, 
unarmed,  aged  as  he  is  ?  Pity  me,  my  son,  fear  not ; 
thou  hast  still  a  hope  of  life.  I  will  give  account  to 
Christ  for  thee,  should  need  be.  I  will  willingly  abide 
thy  death ;  the  Lord  endured  the  death  on  our  behaK. 
For  thy  sake  I  will  give  in  ransom  my  own  soul. 
Stay  !  believe  !  Christ  sent  me.'  But  he  on  hearing 
these  words  first  stood  with  downcast  gaze,  then  flung 
away  his  arms,  then  trembling,  began  to  weep  bitterly, 
and  embraced  the  old  man  when  he  came  up  to  him, 
pleading  with  his  groans,  and  baptising  himself  afresh 
with  his  tears,  only  concealing  his  right  hand.  But 
the  Apostle,  pledging  himself  to  win  remission  for  him 
from  the  Saviour  by  his  supplications,  kneeling  before 
him,  covering  with  kisses  even  his  right  hand  as 
having  been  cleansed  by  repentance,  led  him  back  to 
the  Church,  and  praying  for  him  with  abundant 
prayers,  and  wrestling  with  him  in  earnest  fastings, 
and  disenchanting  him  with  various   winning   strains, 


172  THE    EARLT    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

he  did  not  depart,  as  they  say,  till  he  restored  him  to 
the  bosom  of  the  Church,  affording  a  great  example 
of  true  repentance,  and  a  great  badge  of  renewed  birth, 
a  trophy  of  visible  repentance,  when  in  the  close  of 
the  age  the  angels  receive  those  who  are  truly  peni- 
tent into  heavenly  habitations,  radiantly  rejoicing, 
hymning  their  hymns,  and   opening  the  heavens."^ 

4.  Other  traditions  may  be  briefly  mentioned.  One 
beautiful  story  rests  solely  on  the  authority  of  the 
monk  Cassian  (a.d.  420),  and  is  far  too  late  and  un- 
supported to  have  any  authentic  value. ^  It  is  yet  in 
many  respects  characteristic.  It  tells  us  that  St.  John, 
in  his  hours  of  rest  and  recreation,  used  to  amuse 
himself  by  playing  with  a  little  tame  partridge.  On 
one  occasion  a  young  hunter,  who  had  greatly  desired 
to  see  him,  could  hardly  conceal  his  surprise,  and 
even  his  disapproval,  at  finding  him  thus  employed. 
He  doubted  for  a  moment  whether  this  could  in- 
deed be  the  last  survivor  of  the  Apostles.  "  What 
is  that  thing  which  thou  carriest  in  thy  hand  ?  "  asked 
St.  John.  "  A  bow,"  replied  the  hunter.  "  Why 
then  is  it  unstrung  ? "  "  Because,"  said  the  youth, 
"  were  I  to  keep  it  always  strung  it  would  lose  its 
spring,  and  become  useless."  "  Even  so,"  replied  the 
aged  saint,  "  be  not  offended  at  this  my  brief  re- 
laxation, which  prevents  my  spirit  from  waxing 
faint." 


1  The  Chronicon  Alexandr.  mentions  Smyrna  as  the  city.  Rufinus, 
in  adding  that  John  made  the  youth  a  bislioji,  seems  to  be  mistaking  the 
meaning  of  KaTfaTrjcre  rfj  'EkkAtjo-io.  If,  liowever,  the  story  be  well 
attested,  it  is  strange  that  no  use  should  have  been  made  of  it  in  the  con- 
troversies against  Tertulliau  and  the  Moutanists. 

^  Cassian,  Collat.  xxiv.  21.  The  twenty-four  Collationes  of  Cassiau 
are  prefixed  to  the  works  of  John  Damascene.     See  Zahu,  p.  190. 


ST.   JOHN    AND    THE    PARTRIDGE.  173 

The  beauty  of  tlie  anecdote  lies  far  less  in  the 
common  illustration  of  the  bow  which  is  never  unbent, 
than  in  the  old  man's  tenderness  for  the  creatures  which 
Grod  had  made.  The  Jews  were  remarkable  among: 
the  nations  of  antiquity  for  their  kindness  to  dumb 
animals.  Even  Moses  had  taught  careless  boys  not 
to  take  the  mother  bird  when  they  took  the  young 
from  their  nest,  and  had  meant  to  inculcate  the 
lesson  of  merc}^  in  the  thrice-repeated  command  :  "  Thou 
shalt  not  seethe  the  kid  in  its  mother's  milk." 
It  is  a  beautiful  Rabbinic  legend  of  the  great  legis- 
lator that  once  he  had  followed  a  lamb  far  into  the 
wilderness,  and  when  he  found  it,  took  it  into  his 
arms,  saying,  "  Little  lamb,  thou  knewest  not  what 
was  good  for  thee.  Come  unto  me,  thy  shepherd, 
and  I  will  bear  thee  to  thy  fold."  And  Grod  said, 
"  Because  he  has  been  tender  to  the  straying  lamb, 
he  shall  be  the  shepherd  of  my  people  Israel." 
Another  Talmudic  story  will  show  how  much  the 
Jews  thought  of  this  duty.  Rabbi — the  title  given 
by  way  of  pre-eminence  to  Rabbi  Judali  Hakkodesh, 
the  compiler  of  the  Mislina — was  a  great  sufferer. 
One  day  a  calf  came  bellowing  to  him,  as  though  to 
escape  slaughter,  and  laid  its  head  on  his  lap.  But 
when  Rabbi  pushed  it  away  with  the  remark,  "  Go, 
for  to  this  wast  thou  created,"  they  said  in  heaven, 
"  Lo !  he  is  pitiless ;  let  affliction  come  upon  him." 
But  another  day  his  servant,  in  sweeping  the  room, 
disturbed  some  kittens,  and  Rabbi  said,  "  Let  them 
alone  ;  for  it  is  written,  '  His  tender  mercies  are  over 
aU  His  works.' "  Then  they  said  in  heaven,  "  Let  us 
have  pity  on  him,  for  he  is  pitiful."^ 

1  Bava  Metsia,  f .  85,  a. 


174  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

"  He  prayetli  well  who  loveth  well 

Both  man,  and  ])ii(.l,  and  beast. 
He  prayeth  best  who  loveth  best 

All  things,   both  great  and  small ; 
For  the  dear  God  who  loveth  us, 

He  made  and  loveth  all." 

5.  The  tradition  that  St.  John  lived  in  Ephesus 
the  life  of  a  rigid  ascetic,  eating-  no  animal  food, 
having  the  unshorn  locks  of  a  Nazarite,  and  wearing 
no  garments  but  linen,  has  little  to  recommend  it. 
It  rests  solely  on  the  authority  of  Epiphanius,  who 
wrote  three  centuries  after  St.  John  was  dead. 
No  hint  of  it  is  found  in  the  WTitings  of  those  who 
had  conversed  with  friends  and  pupils  of  the  great 
Apostle.  But  when  the  possibility  of  Apostolic  labours 
and  journey ings  was  over,  he  doubtless  lived  a  life  of 
peaceful  dignity,  not  indeed,  except  in  metaphor,  as  "  a 
Priest,  wearing  the  golden  frontlet,"^  but  as  a  beloved 
and  venerated  old  man  whose  lightest  words  were 
treasured  up  because  he  was  the  last  of  living  men  who 
could  say,  "  I  have  seen  the  Lord." 

G.  The  unsupported  assertion  of  Apollonius,  that  he 
had  raised  a  dead  man  to  life  at  Ephesus,"  may  be 
passed  over  without  further  notice ;  as  also  may  be  the 
assertion  that  he  was,  in  the  Apocalyptic  sense,  "  a 
virgin."^     The  expression  of  St.  Paul  in  1  Cor.  ix.  5,^ 

^  Polyer.  ap.  Euseb.  iii.  31,  hs  iyfvrjQyj  lepeus  rh  TTfTaXov  irf(t>opeKu>s.     Hege- 

sippus  afl&rms  the  same  thing  of  James  {a;p.  Euseb.  ii.  23).     Epiphanhis 
{llaer.   xxix.  4)  appeals  to  the  authority  of  Clemens  in   favour  of  this 

legond   (o\\a    /col    to    ireTaXov  M   Tr)S  Kt(pa\ris  ^^Vf    avr^    <pipiiv)    (COmp.    id. 
Ixxviii.  §  13). 

2  ApoUon.  ap.  Euseb.  v.  IS  ;  Sozomen,  vii.  2(i. 

3  Rev.  xiv.  4  (see  Life  of  St.  Paul,  i.  80;  Tort.  De  Monogam. 
"  Joannes  .  .  Christi  spado ;  "  Amlirosiaster  on  2  Col.  xi.  2 ;  and  in  the 
Pistis  Sophia,  and  Apocjilypsc  of  Esdras  (Fabricius,  Cod.  Jpocr.  II.  585). 

*  "  As  the  rest  of  the  Apostles." 


"LOYE   ONE   ANOTHER."  175 

at  least  gives  some  probability  to  the  belief  that  all 
the  Apostles  were,  like  St.  Peter,  married  men. 

7.  One  more  tradition  has  met  with  almost  universal 
acceptance.^  It  is  that  when  St.  John  "  tarried  at 
Ephesus  to  extreme  old  age,  and  could  only  with  dif- 
ficulty be  carried  to  church  in  the  arms  of  his  disciples, 
and  was  unable  to  give  utterance  to  many  words,  he 
used  to  say  no  more  at  their  several  meetings  than 
this: — '  Little  children,  love  one  another.'  The  disciples 
and  fathers  who  were  there,  wearied  with  hearing 
always  the  same  words,  said,  '  Master,  why  dost  thou 
always  say  this  ? '  '  It  is  the  Lord's  command,'  was 
his    worthy  reply ;    '  and  if   only   this    be    done,   it   is 

. 

8.  We  cannot  with  certainty  name  those  with  whom 
he  was  familiar  during  the  closing  epoch  of  his  life. 
"VVe  only  know  that,  according  to  the  unanimous  testi- 
mony of  antiquity,  Polycarp  was  his  friend  and  hearer,^ 
There  is  less  certainty  about  Ignatius,  Papias,  and 
Quadratus.^ 

^  Lessiiig  lias  touclied  on  this  story  in  liis  Testament  des  Johannes, 
as  Herder  has  tokl  the  story  of  the  Ephesian  robber  in  his  Der  gerettete 
Jungling. 

^  "  Beatus  Joannes  Evangelista  cum  Ephesi  moraretur  usque  ad 
extremam  seuectutem,  et  vix  inter  discipulorum  manus  ad  ecclesiam 
deferrctur,  nee  posset  in  plura  vocem  verba  contexere,  nihil  aliud  per 
singulas  solebat  proferri  collectas,  nisi  hoc  '  FiLlOLi,  diligite  alteku- 
TRUM.'  Tandem  discipuli  et  fratres  qui  aderant,  taedio  affecti  quod 
eadem  semper  audirent,  dixerunt :  '  Magister,  quare  semper  hoc  loqueris  ?  ' 
Qui  respondit  dignani  Joanne  sententiam  :  '  Quia  praeceptum  Domini  est, 
et  si  solum  fiat,  sufficit "  ( Jer.  in  Gal.  vi.  10). 

^  Iren.  ii.  3,  and  ap.  Euseb.  v.  20 ;  Euseb.  iii.  36 ;  Jer.  Chron.  A.D. 
101 ;  de  Virr.  Illustr.  17 ;  Suidas,  s.  v.  ;  and  Tert.  de  Praescr.  Ilaer.  32. 

*  Ignatius  is  said  tj  have  been  a  hearer  of  St.  John,  in  Jer.  Chron. 
A.D.  101.  The  question  about  Papias  Avill  be  touched  upon  in  Excursus 
XIV.,  about  John  the  Presbyter.  Quadratus  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius 
and  Jerome.  Prochorus  and  Bucolus  are  mentioned  by  later  writers  of  no 
authority. 


176  THE   EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

9.  Respecting  the  death  of  St.  John  we  are  left  in 
the  completest  darkness.  Two  words — dvhXe  /laxalpa 
"slew  with  the  sword" — suffice  to  record  the  martyr- 
dom of  his  elder  hrother ;  ^  not  one  word  tells  us  how 
the  last,  and  in  some  respects  the  greatest,  of  the 
Apostles  passed  to  his  reward.  It  is  only  a  very  late 
and  worthless  rumour  which  says  that  he  was  killed  by 
the  Jews.  From  the  silence  of  all  the  early  Fathers 
as  to  this  supposed  martyrdom,  we  may  assume  it  for 
certain  that,  so  far  as  they  knew,  he  died  quietly  at 
Ephesus  in  extreme  old  age.  His  grave  was  shown  at 
Ephesus  for  several  centuries,  and  the  legend,  before 
mentioned,  that  the  dust  was  seen  to  move  with  the 
breathing  of  the  great  Apostle,  as  he  lay  in  immortal 
sleep,  arose  from  the  awe  with  which  it  was  regarded.^ 
But  the  age  which  he  attained — far  surpassing,  if 
some  of  our  accounts  are  true,  the  ordinary  three  score 
years  and  ten^ — only  deepened  the  impression  that  he 

^  Acts  xii.  2. 

2  See  supra,  p.  136 ;  Polycrates,  op.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  31,  39 ;  v.  24 ; 
Jer.  de  Virr.  Illustr.  ix. ;  Aug.  Tract.  124,  in  Joann.  "  Assumat  in  argu- 
ineiit\iin  quod  illic  terra  sonsim  scatere  et  quasi  ebullire  perliibctur  atque 
hoc  ejus  aulielitu  fieri"  (Niceph.  H.  E.  ii.  42;  Zahn,  p.  205). 

3  According  to  Isidore  Hispalensis  (De  ortu  et  ohitti,  71),  he  lived  to 
the  age  of  eiglity-nine.  But  if  he  lived  till  the  reigu  of  Trajan  (Iren.  c. 
Haer.  ii.  225  ;  Jer.  de  Virr.  lUiistr.  ix..  adv.  Jovin.  i.  14)  he  must  have  been 
nearly  ninety-eight.  The  Chronicon  Paschale  says  he  lived  one  hundred 
years  and  seven  months,  and  pseudo-Chrysostom  {de  S.  Johan.)  that  he  lived 
to  one  hundred  and  twenty ;  as  also  Suidas,  s.  v.  'Iwduprjs,  and  Dorotheus 
(Lampe,  p.  92).  In  the  ninth  century  a  writer  named  Georgius  Hamar- 
tolos  quotes  the  authority  of  Papias,  "  who  had  seen  him,''  for  the  statement 
in  the  second  book  of  his  Words  of  the  Lord,  that  John  was  "  i)ut  to  death 
by  the  Jews."  On  the  other  hand,  (i)  Polycrates  {ap.  Euseb.  iii.  31, 
v.  20),  Irenanis  (Haer.  ii.  22,  §  5),  and  Tcrtidlian  {de  Anim.  50)  speak 
of  his  having  died  a  natural  denth,  which  they  certainly  would  not 
have  done  if  there  had  been  any  tradition  of  his  martyrdom;  and  (ii) 
the  epithet  "  martyr "  was  only  applied  to  him  in  consequence  of  the 
legends  about  the  caldron  of  oil  (Tert.  I'raescr.  Haer.  36)  and  the  poison 


LEGENDS    ABOUT    ST.   JOHN.  177 

would  not  die  till  Christ  returned.  He  did  not  die 
till  Christ  had  returned,  in  that  sense  of  the  "  close  of 
the  aeon  "  to  which  His  own  words  and  that  of  His 
Apostles  often  point ;  but  legend  said  that  he  had 
been  taken  alive  to  Heaven  like  Enoch  and  Elijah/ 
and  that  sometimes  he  still  wandered  and  appeared 
on  earth. ^  So  prevalent  were  such  notions  as  to  his 
immortality,  even  during  his  lifetime,  that  in  the 
appendix  to  his  Gospel  he  thought  it  necessary  to  point 
out  the  erroneous  report  of  the  words  of  Jesus  from 
which  they  had  been  inferred. 

cup  ("Acts  of  John,"  Fabricius,  Cod.  Apocr.  i.  576),  as  well  as  with  reference 
to  his  banishment  to  Patuios  (Origen,  in  Matt.  xvi.  6  and  Rev.  i.  9). 
Keim  most  erroneously  says  {Jesu  von  Nazara,  III.  44)  that  Herakleon, 
the  Yalentinian,  quoted  l)y  Clemens  of  Alexandria  {Strom,  iv.  9,  §  73), 
asserted  tliat  the  only  Apostles  who  had  not  suffered  martyrdom  were 
Matthew,  Thomas,  and  Philip.  But,  in  the  first  place,  Herakleon  added 
"Leva,  and  many  others,"  of  whom,  therefore,  John  may  have  been  one; 
;  and,  secondly,  he  is  speaking  not  of  martyrdom  at  all,  but  of  various  kinds 
of  "  confession,"  one  of  which  is  "  confession  by  the  voice  in  the  presence 
of  authorities,"  and  certainly  John  had  made  such  a  "  confession  "  (Acts 
iv.  13,  19).  Even  Scholten  gives  up  the  value  of  this  testimony  and  that 
of  Georg.  Hamartolos  (see  Wilibald  Grimm  in  Hilgenf eld's  Zeitschr.  (1874), 
J).  123).  How  loosely  Hamartolos  quotes  may  be  seen  in  the  same  passage 
(which  was  first  discovered  by  Nolte,  Tub.  Quartalschr.  1S62,  and  is  quoted 
in  Hilgenfeld's  Einleit.  p.  399),  from  his  reference  to  Origen,  who  does 
not  say  that  St.  John  was  martyred  in  our  sense  of  the  word,  but  only 
that  he  was  banished  to  Patmos.  Nor  can  any  counter- inference  be 
drawn  from  a  rhetorical  passage  of  Chrysostom,  Horn,  in  Matt.  Ixv. 

^  Tert.  de  Animd,  50.  Obiit  et  Johannes,  quem  in  adventum  domini 
remansurum  frustra  fuerat  spes.  Ps.-Hippolyt.  de  Consummat.  Mundi. 
Photius  Myriobybl.  Cod.  229.  The  notion  that  he  revised  the  Canon  is 
quite  baseless,  nor  is  it  worth  while  to  do  more  than  mention  the  story  of 
his  having  degraded  the  Presbyter  who  forged  the  Acts  of  Paul  and 
Thecla  (Jer.  de  Virr.  Illust.  ;  Tert.  de  Bajjtismo).  See,  for  all  legendary 
particulars  about  his  death,  Zahn,  Acta  Joannis,  cvii.  sqq.,  200  sqq. 

^  As  in  tlie  famous  legends  of  his  appearance  to  Theodosius  (Theodoret, 
H.  E.  v.  24),  to  Gregory  Thaumaturgus  {Vit.  d.  Greg.  Nyss.),  and  to 
Edward  the  Confessor  and  the  English  pilgrims,  which  is  represented  on 
the  screen  of  the  Confessor's  Cliapel  in  Westminster  Abbey ;  and  of  his 
appearance  to  James  IV.  before  the  battle  of  Floddeu. 

m 


178  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

He  died,  as  liis  brother  had  died,  unnoticed  and 
unrecorded,  but  he  will  live  in  his  writings  till  the 
end  of  time,  to  teach  and  bless  the  world.  "  His 
body  is  buried  in  peace,  but  his  name  liveth  for  ever- 
more. The  people  Avill  tell  of  his  wisdom,  and  the 
congregation  will  show  forth  his  praise."^ 

1  Ecclus.  xliv.  11,  15. 


CHAPTER    XXVIl. 

GENERAL    FEATURES    OF    THE    APOCALYPSE. 

"  Volat  avis  sine  meta, 
Quo  uec  vates,  nee  proplieta 

Evolavit  altius. 
Tarn  implenda  quam  impleta 
Nunquam  vidit  tot  secreta 

Purus  homo  purius." — De  8.  Joanne. 

Milton  lias  spoken  of  tlie  Apocalypse  as  "  the  majestic 
image  of  a  high  and  stately  tragedy,  shutting  up  and 
intermingling  her  solemn  scenes  and  acts  with  a  seven- 
fold chorus  of  hallelujahs  and  harping  symphonies."  ■■• 
In  this  aspect  of  the  book — though  the  notion  of  its 
dramatic  form  must  be  rejected — we  may  perhaps  be 
content  with  the  arrangement  which  places  it  as  the 
last  book  of  Holy  Writ.  But  the  whole  weight  of 
evidence  now  tends  to  prove  that  it  is  not  the  last  book 
in  chronological  order;  that  it  was  written  nearer  the 
beginning  than  the  end  of  St.  John's  period  of  apostolic 
activity  amid   the    Churches   of  Asia ;  ^  that   the   last 

^  Reasons  of  Cliurcli  Government. 

2  Modern  criticism  tends  more  and  more  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
Apocalypse  is  a  genuine  work  of  the  Apostle  St.  John.  Even  Baur  and 
Zeller  regard  it  as  one  of  the  most  certainly  authenticated  of  the  Apostolic 
writings.  The  Alogi  at  the  close  of  the  second  century  rejected  it  only 
on  internal  grounds,  and  their  judgment  is  of  no  importance.  Gains  (circ. 
200)  appears  to  attribute  it  to  Ceriuthus.  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  (a.d. 
'247)  was  inclined,  on  grounds  of  style,  to  assign  it  to  some  other  John, 
but  speaks  of  it  with  reverence.  Eusebius  wavers  about  it,  placing  it 
among  the  spurious  books  in  one  passage,  and  among  the  acknowledged 
books  in  another.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (f  386)  deliberately  excludes  it 
from  the  Canon.     The  Council  of  Laodicea  (a.d.  381)  omits  it.     Am- 

m  2 


180  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

accents  of  revelation  wliich  fall  upon  our  ears  are  not 
those  of  a  treatise  which,  though  it  ends  in  such  perfect 
music,  contains  so  many  terrible  visions  of  blood  and 
fire,  but  are  rather  those  of  the  Gospel  which  tells  us 
that  "the  Word  was  made  flesh,"  and  of  the  Epistle 
which  first  formulated  the  most  blessed  truth  which 
was  ever  uttered  to  human  hearts — the  truth  that  "  God 
is  Love."^ 

And  if  this  conclusion  be  correct,  it  is  impossible 
to  say  how  much  we  lose — what  confusion  we  introduce 
into   the   divine   order — by  neglecting  the  indications 


philocliius,  in  his  Jamb,  ad  Seleucus,  says  that  "  most "  regard  it  as 
spurious.  Junilius,  even  in  the  sixth  century,  says  that  among  the 
members  of  the  Eastern  Church  it  was  viewed  with  great  suspicion. 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  (f  429)  never  cites  it.  Theodoret  (f  457)  alludes 
to  it  very  slightly.  It  is  not  found  in  the  Pesliito.  The  Nestorian 
Church  rejected  it.  It  is  not  mentioned  in  the  sixth  century  by  Cosmas 
Indicopleustes.  Nicephorus  (ninth  century)  in  his  Chronographia  omits 
it.  Even  in  the  fourteenth  century  Nicephorus  Callistus,  while  acceiiting 
it,  thinks  it  necessary  to  mention  that  some  held  it  to  be  the  work  of 
'•  John  the  Presbyter,"  regarded  as  a  different  person  from  "  John  the 
Apostle."  But,  on  the  other  hand,  these  adverse  views  are  to  some  extent 
accounted  for  by  dislike  to  the  difficulty  and  obscurity  of  the  book  (5ia  tJ) 
a.(Ta<p\s  avrrjs  Kol  Svcrd(ptKrov  Kal  oAtyoi?  SLa\aiJi.8av6fxevov  Kal  voovfxevov),  and  by 
the  dangerous  uses  to  which  it  was  often  turned  (yurjSe  avfAtpfpov  ehai  rols 
»ro\AoTs  TO.  iu  avrfj  fiddr)  ipevvav,  Prol.  to  MS.  224).  Dislike  to  chiliastic 
fanaticism,  as  well  as  obvious  critical  difficulties,  also  led  to  its  disparage- 
ment in  many  quarters.  The  positive  evidence  in  its  favour  is  very 
strong.  It  was  accepted  by  Papias,  Justin  Martyr,  Dionysius  of  Corinth, 
Hernias,  Melito  of  Sardis,  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  Apollonius,  and  Ire- 
nseus,  the  Canon  of  Muratori,  and  the  Vetus  Itala,  in  the  second  century ; 
by  Clemens  of  Alexandria  and  Origen  iu  tlie  third ;  by  Yictoriuus 
of  Pettau,  Epliraem  Syrus,  Epiphanius,  Basil,  Hilary,  Athanasius, 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Didynius,  and  Ambrose,  in  the  fourth.  Besides  this, 
the  internal  evidence,  iu  s])ite  of  differences  and  difficulties,  is  too  clear  to 
bo  overlooked,  and  too  subtle  to  have  been  forged. 

'  It  is  hardly  worth  wliile  to  mention  the  Apoci'yphal  writings  at- 
tributed to  St.  John,  such  as  the  one  on  the  Descent  from  the  Cross,  on 
tlie  Death  of  the  Virgin  Maiy,  &c.  See  Lampe,  Prolegomena  ix  131 ; 
Fabricius,  Cod.  Apocr.  N.  T.  pt.  iii.  p.  200. 


ORDER    OF    BOOKS.  181 

of  chronology.  Chronological  sequence  is  always  of 
the  utmost  importance  for  the  right  understanding  of 
what  a  writer  says.  We  are  always  liable  to  judge  of 
him  erroneously  if  we  intermingle  his  writings,  and 
put  those  messages  last  which  he  delivered  first.  It 
is  impossible  to  say  how  much  the  difficulty  in  under- 
standing the  mind  of  St.  Paul  has  been  increased  for 
ordinary  readers  by  the  unfortunate  arrangement — an 
arrangement  made  on  the  most  haphazard  and  unintel- 
ligent principles — which  obliterates  the  lessons  which 
would  naturally  spring  from  the  right  arrangement  of 
his  Epistles.  It  is  a  subject  of  regret  that  the  Eevisers 
of  the  Authorised  Version  did  not  render  a  permanent 
service  by  placing  them  in  that  sequence  which  is  now 
ascertained  with  certainty  as  regards  the  four  several 
groups  into  which  they  fall,  and  which  is  known  with 
approximate  certainty  respecting  almost  every  one  of 
the  separate  Epistles.  How  is  it  possible  for  any  one 
to  enter  into  the  real  working  of  St.  Paul's  mind — the 
effects  produced  upon  his  thoughts  by  years  of  divine 
education — who  is  led  to  infer  that  he  wrote  the  two 
Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  after  he  had  written  not 
only  those  to  the  Romans  and  Galatians,  but  even  after 
those  to  the  Philippians,  Colossians,  and  Ephesians? 
It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  day  will  come  when  the 
obstinacy  of  custom  will  no  longer  prevent  the  cor- 
rection of  these  conventional  misplacements.  But  even 
graver  misapprehensions  result  from  the  misplacement 
of  the  writings  of  St.  John.  Their  present  arrange- 
ment is  due  to  suppositions,  which  lead  to  endless 
difficulties.  It  confuses  the  value  of  precious  lessons, 
and  paves  the  way  for  grievous  errors.  Some  may 
think  it  an  exaggeration  to  say  that  this  closing  of  the 


182  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

Holy  Book  with  the  Apocalypse  has  not  been  without 
grave  consequences  for  the  history  of  Christendom  ; 
but  certainly  it  would  have  been  better  both  for  the 
Church  and  for  the  world  if  we  had  followed  the  divnne 
order,  and  if  those  books  had  been  placed  last  in  the 
canon  which  were  last  in  order  of  time.  Had  this 
been  done,  our  Bible  would  have  closed,  as  the  Book 
of  Grod  to  all  intents  and  purposes  did  close,  with  the 
gentle  and  solemn  warning  of  the  last  Apostle — "Little 
children,  keep  yourselves  from  idols." 

This  then  is  the  order  which  we  here  shall  follow. 
In  the  Apocalypse  the  New  Testament  seems  to  be 
still  speaking  in  the  voice  and  in  the  tones  of  the 
Old  Testament.  In  trying  to  see  something  of  the 
meaning  of  the  Apocalypse,  we  shall  see  the  mind  of  St. 
John  when  he  first  emerged  from  the  overshadowing 
influence  of  St.  James  and  the  Elders  of  Jerusalem ; 
when,  from  the  narrowing  walls  of  the  metropolis  of 
Judaism,  he  passed  forth  into  the  Christian  com- 
munities which  had  grown  up  in  the  heathen  world. 
We  shall  see  how  he  wrote  and  what  he  thought 
while  under  the  guidance  indeed  of  God's  Holy  Spirit, 
but  before  he  had  profited  by  his  thirty  last  years  of 
continuous  education,  and  while  yet  he  was  but  im- 
perfectly acquainted  with  the  language  in  which  his 
greatest  message  was  to  be  delivered.  The  Apocalypse 
was  written  before  he  had  witnessed  the  Coming  of 
Christ  and  the  close  of  the  Old  Dispensation,  in  the 
mighty  catastrophe  which,  by  the  voice  of  God  in 
history,  abrogated  all  but  the  moral  precepts  which 
had  been  uttered  by  the  voice  of  God  on  Sinai.  The 
moral  conceptions  of  the  Gospel  transcend  the  sym- 
bolism of  visions,  and  the  kabbalism  of  numbers.     We 


APOCALYPSE    AND    GOSPEL.  1S3 

do  not  pass  from  the  purest  and  most  etiierial  region 
of  thought  to  dim  images  of  plague  and  war,  fore- 
shadowed by  iire-breathing  horses  and  hell-born  frogs. 
When  we  have  grasped  the  abstract  and  absolute  forms 
in  which  the  Gospel  and  the  Epistles  set  forth  to  us 
the  eternal  conflict  of  life  with  death,  and  light  with 
darkness,  we  have  learnt  higher  and  deeper  lessons  than 
when  we  gaze  on  the  material  symbols  of  scarlet 
dragons  and  locust-horsemen,  and  the  warring  of 
Michael  with  the  devil  and  the  beast. 

A  few  words  from  one  of  our  latest  and  best 
students  of  the  writings  of  St.  John,  though  not 
written  with  this  purpose,  may  serve  to  show  what 
we  lose  by  our  customary  reversal  of  the  proper  order. 

"  In  the  Apocalypse,"  says  Canon  Westcott,  "  the 
thought  is  of  an  outward  coming  for  the  open  judg- 
ment of  men ;  in  the  Gospel,  of  a  judgment  which  is 
spiritual  and  self-executing.  In  the  Apocalypse,  the 
scene  of  the  consummation  is  a  renovated  world ;  in 
the  Gospel,  the  Father's  House,  In  the  former,  the 
victory  and  the  transformation  are  from  without,  by 
might,  and  the  '  future '  is  painted  in  historic  ima- 
gery ;  in  the  latter,  the  victory  and  the  transforma- 
tion are  from  within,  by  a  spiritual  influence,  and  the 

'  future  '    is   present   and   eternal The 

Apocalypse  gives  a  view  of  the  action  of  God  in  regard 
to  men  in  a  life  full  of  sorrow,  and  partial  defeats 
and  cries  for  vengeance  ;  the  Gospel  gives  a  view  of 
the  action  of  God  with  regard  to  Christ,  who  esta- 
blishes   in   the   heart   of   the    believers   a   presence   of 

completed  joy In  a  word,  the    study  of 

the  Synoptists,  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  of  the  Gospel 
of  St.  John  in  succession,  enables  us  to  see  under  what 


1S4  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

Imman  conditions  the  full  majesty  of  Christ  was  per- 
ceived and  declared,  not  all  at  once,  but  step  by  step, 
and  by  the  help  of  the  old  j^roj^hetic  teaching."  ^ 

SECTION    I. 

DATE    OF    THE    APOCALYPSE. 

But  before  we  enter  on  the  difficult  task  of  attempt- 
ing to  see  the  significance  of  the  Apocalypse,  we  must 
once  more  pause  to  cast  a  glance  over  the  condition  of 
the  world  at  the  time  when  it  was  written. 

The  chief  obstacle  to  the  acceptance  of  the  true 
date  of  the  Apocalypse,  arises  from  the  authority  ot 
Irenseus.  Speaking  of  the  number  of  the  Beast, 
and  repeating  those  earl}''  conjectures  which,  as  I 
shall  show  elsewhere,  practically  agree  with  what  is 
now  known  to  be  the  true  solution,  he  remarks  that 
he  cannot  give  any  positive  decision  since  he  believes 
that,  if  such  a  solution  had  been  regarded  as  necessary, 
it  would  have  been  furnished  by  "  him  who  saw  the 
Apocalypse.  For  it  is  not  so  long  ago  that  it  (the 
Apocalypse)  was  seen,  but  almost  in  our  generation, 
towards  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Domitian."  Three 
attempts  have  been  made  to  get  rid  of  this  evidence. 
Guericke  proposes  to  take  " Dometianou"  as  an  ad- 
jective, and  to  render  the  clause  "  near  the  close  of 
the  Domitian  rule,"  i.e.,  the  rule  of  JDomitius  Nero? 
But  the  absence  of  the  article  on  which  he  relies  gives 
no  support  to  his  view,  and  no  scholar  will  accept 
this  hypothesis,  though  he  may  admit  the  possibility 
of   some  confusion    between  the    names   Domitius   and 

^  Introd.,  pp.  Ixxxv — Ixxxvii. 

2  Guerike,  Einleit.  ins  N.  Test.  p.  285. 


DATE    OF    APOCALYPSE.  185 

Doraitian.^  Others  again  make  the  word  icopdOTj 
mean  "  /le,  i.e.,  St.  John,  was  seen,"  since  no  nomi- 
native is  expressed.  Now  Irenseus,  in  the  same  pas- 
sage and  elsewhere,  dwells  so  much  on  the  fact  of 
testimony  given  by  those  who  had  seen  John  face  to 
face,  that  we  cannot  set  aside  this  suggestion  as  im- 
possible.^ It  has  the  high  authority  of  Wetstein.  Again, 
the  Latin  translator  of  Irenseus  renders  the  verb  not 
"  visa  est,"  "the  Apocalypse  was  seen,"  but  "visum  est," 
"  the  Beast  {rh  Orjpiov)  was  seen."  The  language  is, 
unfortunately,  ambiguous,  and  as,  in  uncritical  times,  it 
would  naturally  be  understood  in  what  appears  to  be 
the  most  obvious  sense,  it  is  not  surprising  that  St. 
Jerome  follows  the  supjDosed  authority  of  Irenseus  in 
dating  the  Apocalypse  from  the  later  epoch.  Eusebius 
says  that  St.  John  was  banished  to  Patmos  in  the  reign 
of  Domitian,  but,  even  if  he  be  not  misunderstanding 
the  meaning  of  Irenseus,  his  evidence  goes  for  little, 
since  he  leant  to  the  view  that  the  Apocalypse  was 
written  by  John  the  Presbyter,  and  not  by  the  Apostle. 
But  the  authority  of  Irena^us  was  not  regarded  as  de- 
cisive, even  if  his  meaning  be  undisputed.  Tertullian 
places  the  banishment  to  Patmos  immediately  after  the 
deliverance  from  the  cauldron  of  boiling  oil,  and  Jerome 
says  that  this  took  place  in  the  reign  of  Nero.^  Epi- 
phanius  says  that  St.  John  was  banished  in  the  reign  of 
Claudius,  and  the  earliest  Apocalyptic  commentators^  '^  ^  ■ 
as  well  as  the  Syriac  and  Theophylact,  all  place  the 
writing  of  the  Apocalypse  in  the  reign  of  Nero.     To 

^  This  is  the  view  of  Niermeyer. 

'  iJiapTvpovvrdiv  iKtlvuv  tu>v  kut'   utpiv  'luidwriv  eaipaKOTuy    (Ireil.    ad    HcLCT. 

V.  30). 

'  Tert.  Be  Praescr.  36,  Jer.  c.  Jovin.  i.  26. 


;3 


p  1% 


186  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

these  must  be  added  the  author  of  the  "  Life  of  Timo- 
theus,"  of  which  extracts  are  preserved  by  Photius. 
Clemens  of  Alexandria  and  Origen  only  say  that  "  John 
was  banished  by  the  tyrant,"  and  this  on  Christian 
lips  may  mean  Nero  much  more  naturally  than 
Domitian.^  Moreover,  if  we  accej)t  erroneous  tradition 
or  inference  from  the  ambiguous  expressions  of  Irena^us, 
we  are  landed  in  insuperable  difficulties.  By  the  time 
that  Domitian  died,  St.  John  was,  according  to  all 
testimony,  so  old  and  so  infirm  that  even  if  there  were 
no  other  obstacles  in  the  wa}^,  it  is  impossible  to 
conceive  of  him  as  wTiting  the  fiery  pages  of  the 
Apocalypse.  Iren?eus  may  have  been  misinterpreted ; 
but  even  if  not,  he  might  have  made  a  "  slip  of  me- 
mory," and  confused  Domitian  with  Nero.  I  myself, 
in  talking  to  an  eminent  statesman,  have  heard  him 
make  a  chronological  mistake  of  some  years,  even  in 
describing  events  in  which  he  took  one  of  the  most 
prominent  j^arts.  We  cannot  accept  a  dubious  expres- 
sion of  the  Bishop  of  Lyons  as  adequate  to  set  aside 
an  overwhelming  weight  of  evidence,  alike  external  and 
internal,  in  proof  of  the  fact  that  the  Apocal^^pse  was 
written,  at  the  latest,  soon  after  the  death  of  Nero.^ 

Eor  the  sole  key  to  the  Apocalypse,  as  to  every 
book  which  has  any  truth  or  greatness  in  it,  lies  in  the 
heart  of  the  writer;  and  the  heart  of  every  writer 
must  be  intensely  influenced   by  the  spirit  or  the  cir- 

^  See  Epii)liau.  Ilaer.  li.  12  and  33;  Audrcas  on  Rov.  vi.  12;  Arethas 
on  Rov.  vii.  1 — 8 ;  Syriac  MS.  No.  IH ;  Thcopliylact.  Comment,  in  Joann. 

-  This  result  is  now  accepted,  not  only  by  Liicke,  Scliwog'ler.  Baur, 
Ziillig,  De  Wette,  Renan,  Kreukel,  Bleek,  Reuss,  Reville,  Volkmar, 
Buusen,  Diisterdieck,  &c.,  but  also  by  such  Avriters  as  Stier,  Neander, 
Guericke,  Auberlen,  F.  D.  Maurice,  Moses  Stuart,  Niermeyer,  Desprez, 
S.  Davidson,  the  author  of  The  Parousia,  Aube,  &c. 


THE    APOCALYPSE.  187 

cumstances  of  tlie  times  in  wliicli  lie  writes.  His 
words  are  addressed  in  the  first  instance  to  his  living 
contemporaries,  and  it  is  only  through  them  that  he 
can  hope  to  reach  posterity.  Now,  if  there  was  ever 
any  book  which  bears  upon  every  page  the  impress  of 
reality — the  proof  that  it  is  written  in  words  which 
came  fresh  and  burning  from  the  heart,  and  passed 
fresh  and  burning  into  the  hearts  of  others — that 
book  is  the  Apocalypse.  "  Without  tears,"  says 
Bengel,  "  it  was  not  written ;  without  tears  it  cannot 
be  understood."  It  comes  to  us  with  tenfold  force 
when  we  remember  the  tumult  of  emotions  with  whicli 
the  small  and  persecuted  communities  of  early  Chris- 
tians found  themselves  in  direct  antagonism  to  the 
Eoman  Empire,  as  well  as  to  the  Jewish  religion. 
Could  any  j)owers  more  venerated  and  more  por- 
tentous than  these  be  ever  banded  together  to  crush 
a  nascent  faith  ?  The  Apocalypse  is  not  in  the  least  a 
book  of  dim  abstractions,  of  fantastic  enigmas,  of 
monstrous  symbols.  It  had  a  very  definite  object,  and 
a  very  intelligible  meaning  for  all  who  had  been  trained 
in  familiarity  with  the  strange  form  of  literature  to 
which  it  belongs.  The  single  phrase  of  TertuUian — 
"  Sub  Nerone  damnatio  invaluit " — goes  far  towards 
giving  us  a  clue  to  the  meaning  of  the  Apostle.  John 
writes  as  a  Christian  prophet  would  be  likely  to  write 
who  may  have  seen  a  Peter  crucified  and  a  Paul  be- 
headed.^ The  book  is  a  rallying  cry  to  the  Christian 
warriors  who  might  seem  liable  to  be  trampled  to  the 
earth  in  irremediable  defeat. 

^  Tlie  remarkable  expression,  "And  I  saw  the  souls  of  tliem  tliat  had 
heen  helieacled  {ireireAeKia/xei/oov)  for  the  testimony  of  Jesus  "  (Rev.  xx.  4), 
may  (as  Ewald  thinks,  Gesch.  vi.  618)  point  especially  to  tlie  deatli  of  St. 
Paul.     "  Beheading  "  was  the  form  of  death  adopted  for  Roman  citizens. 


188  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

The    book    has    been    persistently   misunderstood. 
Herder  might  well  ask,   "  Was  there  a  key  sent  with 
the   book,   and  has   this   been   lost?     Was   it   thrown 
into    the    Sea   of  Patmos,    or   into   the   Maeander  ? " 
Intolerance,    ignorance,    sectarian   fierceness,    the    san- 
guinary  factiousness  of  an  irreligious  religionism,  the 
eternal  Pharisaism   of  the  human  heart,  have  made  of 
it  their  favourite  camping-ground.     Others  have  been 
driven  into  a  natural  but  irreverent  scorn  of  it,  because 
the}^  turn  with  disgust  from  the  degradation  to  which 
it  has  been  subjected  by  fanatical  bigotry.     But  when 
rightly  used,   it  is    full  of   blessed   instruction,   and  it 
would  never  have  been  discredited  as  it  has  been,  if 
its   own  repeated  assertions    and   indications    had   not 
been  ignored.     Instead  of   seeking  out   the   meanings 
which    must    have    made    it    precious    to    its    original 
readers,  as,  in   great  part  at   least,  to  all  loving  and 
humble  Christian  hearts,  men  have  wandered  into  the 
quagmire    of    private    interpretations    after    the    ic/nis 
fafuus  of  religious  hatred.      God  has  revealed  himself 
in  the  history  of  the  Church  and  the  World,  but  this 
manifestation    of   God  in   history  has  been    hopelessly 
confused  by  an  attempt   to  make   it   correspond  with 
symbols  with  which  it  has  no  connexion.     The  surest 
and   deadliest  injur}^  to  which   the  Apocalypse  can  be 
subjected  is  to  treat  it  as  a  sort  of  anticipated  Gibbon, 
or  a  controversial  compendium  of  ecclesiastical  disputes. 
Its  s3mibols   have  become  plastic  in  the  hot  hands  of 
party  factiousness,  but  under  such  manipulations  they 
have  been  rendered  unintelligible  to  the  eyes  of  truth 
and  love. 

Happily  these   "theological  romances"^   of  Apoca- 

1  Moses  Stuart. 


ORIGIN    OF    THE    APOCALYPSE.  189 

lyptic  commentary  have  had  their  clay.  Like  a  thou- 
sand other  phantoms  of  exegesis,  they  are  vanishing 
into  the  limbo  of  the  obsolete.  They  may  linger  on 
for  a  time,  like  spectres  not  yet  exorcised,  but  they  are 
doomed  to  disappear  for  ever  in  the  broadening  light 
of  a  sounder  knowledge. 

The  Apocalypse  had  its  immediate  origin  in  two 
events  which  happened  at  this  period  of  the  life  of 
St.  John.  One  was  the  Neronian  persecution.  The 
other  was  the  outbreak  of  the  Jewish  war.  It  was 
not  until  these  events  were  over,  it  was  not  until  their 
divine  teaching  had  done  its  work,  that  a  third  and 
more  gradual  event — the  development  of  Gnostic  teach- 
ing in  the  form  of  new  Christologies — called  forth  in 
its  turn  the  Gospel  and  the  Epistles  of  St.  John 
as  the  final  utteranc3  of  Christian  revelation. 

Unless  we  study  these  events  there  is  no  chance 
of  our  understanding  the  writings  of  St,  John.  Those 
writings,  like  all  the  Books  of  Scripture,  are  indeed 
full  of  sacred  lessons  for  every  humble  heart.  The 
comprehension  of  such  lessons — which,  after  all,  are 
the  best  and  deepest — requires  nothing  but  the  spiritual 
enlightenment  of  a  pure  and  truthful  soul.  But  the 
historical  and  critical  knowledge  of  a  book  demands 
other  qualifications  ;  and  it  has  been  a  fatal  mistake 
of  Christians  to  claim  infallibility  for  their  subjective 
convictions,  not  only  in  matters  of  religious  experience, 
but  in  questions  of  history  and  criticism,  respecting 
which  they  may  be  quite  incompetent  to  pronounce  an 
opinion  of  any  value. 

We  have  already  seen  what  manner  of  man  Nero 
was.     The  spectacle  of  such  a  man  seated  on  the  Im- 


190  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

perial  throne  of  the  heathen  world  accounts  for  the 
abhorrence  which  he  inspired  as  a  living  impersonation 
of  the  "world-rulers  of  this  darkness."^  We  have 
also  seen  the  origin  and  history  of  the  Neronian  per- 
secution, and  the  circumstances  which  connected  it 
with  the  burning  of  Home.  For  the  history  of  these 
events  we  must  refer  back  to  the  first  volume.  But 
we  must  remind  the  reader  tliat  the  Apocalypse  of  St. 
John  can  only  be  rightly  read  by  the  lurid  light  which 
falls  upon  it  from  the  Burning  City — under  the  hor- 
rible illumination  flung  by  the  bale-fires  of  martyrdom 
upon  the  palace  and  gardens  of  the  Beast  from  the 
abyss. 

A  great  French  artist  has  painted  a  picture  of 
Nero  walking  with  his  lictors  through  the  blackened 
streets  of  Eome  after  the  conflagration.  He  represents 
him  as  he  was  in  mature  age,  in  the  uncinctured  robe 
with  which,  to  the  indignation  of  the  noble  Romans, 
he  used  to  aj)pear  in  public.  He  is  obese  with  self- 
indulgence.  Upon  his  coarsened  features  rests  that 
dark  cloud,  which  they  must  have  often  worn  when 
his  conscience  was  most  tormented  by  the  furies  of 
his  murdered  mother  and  his  murdered  wives.  Shrink- 
ing back  among  the  ruins  are  two  poor  Christian  slaves, 
who  watch  him  with  looks  in  which  disgust  and  de- 
testation struggle  with  fear.  The  picture  puts  into 
\dsible  form  the  feelings  of  horror  with  which  the 
brethren  must  have  regarded  one  whom  they  came  to 
consider  as  the  incarnate  instrument  of  Satanic  an- 
tagonism against  God  and  against  His  Christ, — as  the 
deadliest  and  most  irresistible  enemy  of  all  that  is 
called  holy  or  that  is  worshipped. 

1  Eph.  vi.  12. 


THE    NERONIAN    PERSECUTION.  191 

Did  St.  John  ever  see  that  frightful  spectacle  of  a 
monster  in  human  flesh?  Was  he  a  witness  of  the 
scenes  which  made  the  circus  and  the  gardens  of  Nero 
reek  with  the  fumes  of  martyrdom  ?  We  have  already 
observed  that  tradition  points  in  that  direction.  In 
the  silence  which  falls  over  many  years  of  his  bio- 
graphy, it  is  possible  that  he  may  have  been  compelled 
by  the  Christians  to  retire  from  the  menace  of  the 
storm  before  it  actually  burst  over  their  devoted  heads. 
St.  Paul,  as  we  believe,  was  providentially  set  free 
from  his  Roman  imprisonment  just  in  time  to  be 
preserved  from  the  first  outburst  of  the  Neronian  perse- 
cution.^ Had  it  not  been  for  this,  who  can  tell  whether 
St.  Paul  and  St.  John  and  St.  Peter  might  not  have 
been  clothed  in  the  skins  of  wild  beasts  to  be  torn 
to  pieces  by  the  bloodhounds  of  the  amphitheatre  ? 
or  have  stood,  each  in  his  pitchy  tunic,  to  form  one 
of  those  ghastly  human  torches  which  flared  upon 
the  dark  masses  of  the  abominable  crowd?  But  even 
if  St.  John  never  saw  Rome  at  this  period,  many 
a  terrified  fugitive  of  the  "  vast  multitude "  which 
Tacitus  mentions  must  have  brought  him  tidings  about 
those  bloodstained  orgies  in  which  the  Devil,  the 
Beast,  and  the  False  Prophet — "  that  great  Anti- 
Trinity  of  Hell "  —  were  wallowing  through  the 
mystic  Bab^don  in  the  blood  of  the  martyrs  of  the 
Lord. 

Supposing  that  St.  John  had  written  an  apocalyptic 
book  at  this  time,  is  it  not  a  priori  certain  that  these 
events,  and  the  appalling  figure  of  the  Antichrist  who 
then  filled  the  world's  eye,  would  have  been  prominent 
in   such   a   book  ?     Do   not  contemporary   events  and 

1  See  my  Life  of  St.  Paul,  ii.  604—607. 


192  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

contemporary  persecutions  figure  in  every  one  of  the 
numerous  Apocalypses  in  which  Jews  and  Christians 
at  this  epoch  expressed  their  hopes  and  fears  ?  Is  it 
not  a  matter  of  certainty  to  every  reasonable  man,  that 
the  Apocalypse  must  be  interpreted  by  laws  similar  to 
those  which  regulate  every  other  specimen  of  that 
Semitic  form  of  literature  to  which  it  avowedly  belongs  ? 
Does  not  the  fact  that  the  anticipated  Antichrist  of 
Daniel  is  the  persecutor  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  make  it 
in  the  higliest  degree  probable  that  the  incarnate  Anti- 
christ of  St.  John  is  the  persecutor  Nero  ? 

The  Neronian  persecution,  then,  was  one  of  the 
two  events  which  awoke  in  Christian  hearts  those 
thundering  echoes  of  which  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John 
is  the  prolonged  and  perpetuated  reverberation.  The 
other  event  was  the  outbreak  of  the  Jewish  war  and 
the  siesfe  of  Jerusalem.  If  we  succeed  in  fixinsr  the 
date  of  the  Apocalypse,  we  shall  be  able  to  know  what 
was  the  exact  condition  of  the  Empire  and  of  the  Holy 
Land,  of  Judaism,  Heathendom,  and  Christianity — 
of  the  world  and  of  the  Churcli  of  Christ — when  St. 
John  saw  and  wrote. 

But  while  the  date  may  be  fixed  with  much  pro- 
bability, it  cannot  be  fixed  v/itli  certainty.  All  that 
can  be  asserted  is  that  the  book  was  written  before  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  burning  of  the 
Temple.  This  is  clear  from  the  beginning  of  the 
eleventh  chapter.  The  Temple  is  there  spoken  of 
as  still  standing,  in  language  wdiich  closely  resembles, 
and  indeed  directly  refers  to,  the  language  of  our  Lord 
in  his  great  Eschatological  discourse.  Such  language, 
and  the  whole  sequel  of  it,  would  have  been  unreal  and 
misleading,  if,  at  the  time  when  it  was  penned,  nothing 


OUTBREAK    OF    JEWISH    WAR.  193 

remained  of  tlie  Temple  and  city  of  Jerusalem  but 
heaps  of  bloodstained  stones.  But  though  Jerusalem 
was  not  yet  taken,  there  are  signs  that  the  armies  had 
already  gathered  for  her  anticipated  destruction,  and 
that  the  whole  length  of  the  land  had  been  deluged 
and  drenched  with  the  blood  of  its  sons.  We  cannot 
tell  the  exact  year  in  which  the  Christians — warned, 
as  Eusebius  says,  "  by  a  certain  oracle  given  to  their 
leaders  by  revelation;"^  or,  as  Epiphanius  tells  us,  "by 
an  angel  "^ — left  the  doomed  and  murderous  city  and 
took  refuge  across  the  Jordan,  in  the  Peraean  town 
of  Pella.^  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  their  flight 
took  place  before  the  actual  blockade  of  Jerusalem 
by  Titus,  and  probably  in  a.d.  68.  It  seems  to  be 
alluded  to  in  Eev.  xii.  14.  Now  the  first  threatening 
commotions  in  Judsea  began  in  a.d.  64,  shortly  after 
the  fire  of  Eome.  The  actual  revolt  burst  forth  at 
Csesarea  in  a.d.  65.  Vespasian  was  despatched  to 
Judsea  by  Nero  during  his  visit  to  Grreece  in  a.d.  66. 
He   arrived  in   Palestine  early  in   a.d.    67.     The  years 

1  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  5  (/cara  nva  xpv^f^^"  /c.T.A..).  Probably  the  leading 
Presbyters  of  the  Church  pointed  out  that  the  signs  of  the  times  indicated 
by  our  Lord,  as  He  sat  two  days  before  His  death  on  the  Mount  of  Olives 
(Matt.  xxiv.  15,  seq.),  now  clearly  required  obedience  to  His  warning. 

^  Epiphan.  De  Mensuris,  15.  In  Haer.  xxix.  7,  he  refers  directly 
to  the  command  of  Christ.  Jerusalem  might  be  said  to  be  "  circled 
with  armies  "  (Luke  xxi.  20),  long  before  its  actual  circumvallation  by 
Titus. 

3  Which  might  well  be  described  as  in  "the  mountains."  Pella 
is  in  a  lofty  position,  and  is  on  one  side  surrounded  by  precipices.  It 
was  the  nearest  city  to  Jerusalem  which  was  at  once  safe  and  neutral. 
Though  a  free  city,  it  had  placed  itself  more  or  less  under  the  protection 
of  Agrippa  II.,  and  by  so  doing  had  severed  its  fortunes  from  those  of 
the  Jews.  By  their  flight  to  this  town,  the  Jewish  Christians  cast  in 
their  lot  wth  the  opponents  of  Jewish  fanaticism.  It  was  one  of  the  steps 
iu  that  Divine  education  which  showed  them  that  the  days  of  Mosaism 
and  of  the  synagogue  were  past. 

n 


194  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

67  and  08  were  spent  in  suppressing  the  brave  resis- 
tance of  Galilee  and  Persea.  Nero  died  in  June,  08. 
Political  uncertainties  caused  a  suspension  of  the  Roman 
measures  during  the  year  09,  but  when  Vespasian  felt 
himself  secure  of  the  throne,  in  a.d.  70,  he  sent  Titus 
to  besiege  Jerusalem.  The  siege  began  early  in  March, 
70,  and  was  brought  to  its  terrible  conclusion  in  August 
of  the  same  year. 

But  there  are  two  passages.  Rev.  xiii.  3,  and  xvii.. 
10,  11,  which  might  seem  to  give  us  the  very  year  in 
which  the  book  was  written.  The  former  tells  us 
about  the  Wild  Beast,  and  how  "  one  of  his  heads  was 
smitten  to  death  and  his  deathstroke  was  healed ; "  the 
other,  explaining  the  previous  symbols,  tells  us  that  the 
seven  heads  of  the  Beast  "  are  seven  kings ;  the  five  are 
fallen;  the  one  is;  the  other  is  not  yet  come."  Now 
we  shall  see  hereafter,  with  perfect  certainty,  that  the 
Wild  Beast,  and  the  wounded  head  of  the  Wild  Beast, 
are  interchangeable  symbols  for  Nero,  The  five 
"  kings  "  then  can  be  no  other  than  Augustus,  Tiberius, 
Gaius,  Claudius,  and  Nero.  The  reckoning  of  the 
"  kings  "^  from  Augustus  is  the  natural  reckoning,  and 
is  the  one  adopted  by  Tacitus.  If  Suetonius  begins 
his  Twelve  Caesars  with  the  life  of  Julius,  the  greatest 
of  them  all,  the  reason  is  that  he  wishes  to  give  an 
account  of  the  Csesarean  family,  and  of  the  hero 
ejjoni/nius  who  raised  them  to  the  summit  of  earthly 
power.^  So  far  then  it  might  be  regarded  as  certain 
that  Galba  is  the  sixth  emperor,  and  therefore  that  the 

1  "  Kings "  was  a  conmiou  title  for  the  Roman  Emperors  in  the 
Eastern  provinces  (see  Ewakl,  Gesch.  xi.  604,  seqq.). 

-  "  Lnperator  "  was  a  title  wliicli  Julius  Cffisar  bore,  in  common  with 
Cicero  and  other  private  persons.  He  never  was  "  Pi-inceps."  The  last 
private  Imperator  was  Junius  Blaesus,  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius. 


THE    FIYE    KINGS.  195 

Apocalypse  was  written  between  June,  68,  when  Nero 
committed  suicide,  and  January,  69,  when  Galba  was 
murdered.  And  since  the  news  of  Galba's  successful 
rebellion  could  not  have  been  known  without  a  little 
delay,  we  might  fix  the  date  of  the  Vision  in  the  summer 
or  autumn  of  a.d.  68. 

This  is,  indeed,  the  all  but  certain  date  of  the  book. 
We  have  already  seen  reason  to  set  aside  the  notion  of 
its  having  been  written  in  the  reign  of  Domitian,  as 
due  partly  to  the  mistake  of  Irenseus,^  and  partly  to 
idle  repetition  and  idle  inference.  It  is  not,  however, 
impossible  that  Vespasian  and  not  Galba  may  have  been 
regarded  by  the  Apostle,  no  less  than  by  others,  as 
having  been  in  reality  the  sixth  emperor.  Galba, 
Otho,  and  Vitellius  passed  like  phantoms  across  the 
imperial  stage.  The  Sibyllist  dismisses  them  in  the 
single  line — "  After  him  three  kings  shall  be  destroyed 
by  one  another."^  The}''  neither  belonged  to  the  old 
imperial  family,  nor  did  they  found  a  new  one.  Be- 
tween them  they  barely  covered  the  space  of  a  year 
and  a  half.  It  is  true  that  they  are  spoken  of  as 
"  Csesars "  both  by  Tacitus  and  Suetonius,  though 
Vitellius  refused  the  name.  But  when  Vespasian 
succeeded  the  murdered  Vitellius,  at  the  end  of  a.d. 
69,  it  was  believed  that  the  Flavian  dynasty  would 
be  secure  and  lasting,  and  the  fashion  arose  of  re- 
garding the  reigns  of  Galba,  Otho,  and  Vitellius  as 
a   mere    "rebellion  of  three  military  cJncfsy^      If   this 


^  The  Commentary  of  Andreas,  Bp.  of  the  Cappadocian  Csesarea,  in 
the  fifth  century,  rightly  says,  in  contradiction  of  Irenseus,  that  it  was 
supposed  to  have  been  wi'itteu  before  a.d.  70. 

2  Orac.  Sib.  v.  35. 

'  The  language  of  Suetonius  is  very  remarkable,  and  certainly  lends 

n  2 


196  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

were  the  view  of  the  seer,  the  date  of  tlie  Apocalypse 
would  be  brought  down  to  a.d.  70.  The  earlier  date 
accords  better  with  his  own  indications. 

The  tension  of  feeling  caused  by  the  tremendous 
conflict  of  the  Antichrist  against  the  Saints  must  have 
been  still  further  strained  by  the  imminent  destruc- 
tion which  seemed  to  threaten  the  existence  of  the 
Jewish  race.  To  minds  already  glowing  with  expec- 
tations of  the  Coming  of  Christ,  and  the  close  of 
the  ages,  the  signs  of  the  times  must  have  worn  a 
portentous  aspect.  The  sunset  sky  of  the  ancient  dis- 
pensation was  red  and  lowering  with  the  prophecy 
of  storm.  The  "  woes  of  the  Messiah  " — the  travail 
throes  of  the  Future  Age  —  the  pangs  which  were 
to  accompany  the  new  birth  of  the  Messianic  king- 
dom— were  already  shaking  the  world. ^  There  were 
wars  and  rumours  of  wars.  There  were  famines  and 
earthquakes.  The  Church  had  barely  passed  through 
the  anguish  of  the  great  tribulation.  Christians  had 
realised  what  a  tremendous  thing  it  was  to  be  "  hated 
of  all  men,"  and  to  be  treated  as  the  offscourings  of 
the  world.  Hundreds  of  martyrs  had  been  baptized  in 
blood.  The  name  of  "  Christian  "  was  regarded  as  the 
synonym  of  malefactor ;  and  all  the  world  hated  Chris- 
tians, on  the  false  charge  that  Christians  hated  all  the 
world.     Many  were  faltering  in  the  faith ;    many  had 

some  sanction  to  the  views  of  those  who  regard  Vespasian  as  the  sixth 
Emperor.  He  says,  "  liebellione  trium  principum  et  csede  incertum  din 
et  quasi  vagum  Imperium  suscepit  firmavitque  tandem  gens  Flavia " 
{Vesp.  1). 

^  This  is  the  term  used  not  only  by  the  Rabbis,  but  also  by  tlie 
Evangelists,  apxh  ^^^vuiv  (Matt.  xxiv.  8;  Mark  xiii.  8).  It  is  a  rendering 
of  tlie  Hebrew  Cheheli  hammeshiach.  (See  Hos.  xiii.  14;  Isa.  xxxvii.  3; 
Mie.  iv.  9;  v.  2,  &c.) 


SIGNS    OF    THE    TIMES.  197 

proved  false  to  it.  Even  within  its  sacred  fold 
many  regarded  each  other  with  suspicion  and  hatred. 
There  were  false  Christs  and  false  Prophets.  The 
powers  of  heaven  were  being  shaken.  Suns  and  moons 
and  stars — from  Roman  Emperors  down  to  Jewish 
Priests  —  were  one  after  another  waxing  dim,  and 
shooting  from  their  spheres.  Clearly  the  day  must  be 
at  hand  of  w^iich  the  Lord  had  said  that  it  would  come 
ere  that  generation  passed  away,  and  that  all  the  things 
of  which  He  had  spoken  would  be  fulfilled.  Men  were 
not  expecting  it.  They  were  eating  and  drinking,  as 
in  the  days  of  Noah,  marrying  and  giving  in  marriage, 
drinking  wdth  the  drunken,  and  beating  their  fellow 
servants  in  all  the  security  of  greed,  in  all  the  insolence 
of  oppression.  But,  none  the  less  were  the  powers  of 
vengeance  nursing  the  impatient  earthquake,  and  a 
belief  in  the  eternal  laws  of  morality  was  alone  suffi- 
cient to  make  every  Christian  feel  that  the  fiat  had 
gone  forth — 

"  Rome  shall   perish  !  write  that  word 

In  the   blood  that    she  hath   spilt  : 
Perish  hopeless  and   abhorred, 

Deep  in  ruin  as  in  guilt." 

The  fields  were  white  for  the  harvest,  the  grapes  were 
purple  for  the  vintage  of  the  world.  The  carcases  of 
a  corrupt  Judaism  and  a  yet  corrupter  heathendom 
seemed  already  to  be  falling  in  the  wilderness ;  and  on 
the  distant  horizon  were  visible  the  dark  specks  which 
the  seer  knew  to  be  the  gathering  vultures  of  retribu- 
tion, which  should  soon  fill  the  air  with  "  the  rushing 
of  their  congregated  wings." 


19S  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

SECTION    II. 

THE     REVOLT     OF     JUD^A. 

"Conquest,  thy  fi<>ry  wing  tlieir  race  pursued. 
Thy  thirsty  poniard  blushed  with  infant  blood." 

Heber. 

On  the  whole  the  Jews  had  borne  with  reasonable 
patience,  for  nearly  a  hundred  years,  the  odious  yoke 
of  the  Herods  and  the  Romans.  The  volcano  of  their 
fanaticism  was,  indeed,  only  slumbering;  and  every 
now  and  then  such  events  as  the  rebellion  of  Judas 
of  Galilee,  or  the  bold  teaching  of  the  Pharisee  Mat- 
thias Ben  Margaloth,  or  some  turbulent  movement 
of  the  Zealots,  or  some  secret  assassination  by  the 
Sicarii,  proved  to  the  Procurators  that  it  was  not  ex- 
tinct. The  affair  of  the  Standards,  and  of  the  Gilt 
Votive  Shields,  and  of  the  Corban  Money,  under  the 
rule  of  Pilate — the  fierce  persistency  with  which  the 
Jews  braved  death  by  the  sword  or  by  famine,  rather 
than  admit  the  desecration  of  their  Temple  by  the 
Colossus  of  Caligula — showed  the  Eomans  that  they 
were  walking  over  hot  lava  and  recent  ashes. 
The  rise  of  false  Messiahs  under  Fadus,  the  seditious 
movements  in  Samaria  under  Cumanus,  the  spread  of 
brigandage  under  Felix,  the  establishment  of  a  sort  of 
vehm^eric/it,  which  carried  out  by  murder  its  secret 
decrees,  the  quarrels  between  Agrippa  and  the  Jews 
under  Festus  about  the  wall  of  his  palace,  the  avarice 
of  Albinus  (a.u.  G3),  and  the  manner  in  which  he 
allowed  the  disgracefvd  factions  of  rivals  in  the  High 
Priesthood  to  assail  each  other  unchecked,  all  tended 
to  precipitate  the  end.  But  though  the  Jews  and  the 
Eomans  felt  for  each  other  a  profound  hatred,  there  was 


MUTUAL    HATRED.  199 

no  overt  rebellion  till  the  days  of  Gressius  Florus,  who 
was  appointed  Procurator  in  a.d.  65.  Under  the  best 
of  circumstances  the  administrative  customs  of  the 
Eomans  were  odious  to  the  Jews,  and  although  the 
Romans  were  anxious  to  extend  to  them  the  utmost 
limits  of  a  contemptuous  tolerance,  yet  they  looked 
upon  the  conduct  of  the  Jews  as  so  unreasonable,  so 
fanatical,  so  unworthy  of  ordinary  human  beings,  that 
they  were  in  a  state  of  perpetual  exasperation.  The 
Jews,  in  return,  regarded  the  Eomans  as  the  imper- 
sonation of  brutal  violence,  infamous  atheism,  and 
impure  greed.  In  the  Talmud,  and  in  the  Books  of 
Esdras  and  Enoch,  we  see  how  they  loathed  their 
political  rulers.  The  arrogance  of  Jewish  exclusive - 
ness  constantly  betrayed  itself  in  language  which 
showed  that  they  regarded  Gentiles  as  worthless,^  and 
even  Proselytes  as  little  better  than  a  blotch  on  the 
health  of  Israel.^  On  the  other  hand,  Tacitus  shows  us 
how  a  grave  Gentile  historian  could  describe  the  Jews 
as  no  people  at  all,  but  the  mere  scum  and  offscouring 
of  peoples,  the  descendants  of  a  horde  of  leprous  slaves, 
devoted  to  execrable  superstitions,  degraded  by  ass- 
worship,  and  animated  by  phrenetic  hatred  of  all 
nations  except  themselves.  The  mutual  aversion  of 
Semites  and  Aryans  thus  finds  ample  illustration  in 
the  literature  of  both. 

Between  such  elements  there  could  be  no  deep  or 
lasting  peace,  least  of  all  when  the  Jews  were  so  seeth- 

1  Bava  Kama,  f.  113,  b;  Sanhedrin,  f.  59,  a ;  Sopherim,  15 ;  Bosh 
Hashanah,  f .  23,  a.  These,  and  other  similar  passages,  may  be  seen  trans- 
lated in  Dr.  McCaul's  Old  Paths,  Hershon's  Treasures  of  the  Talmud,  &c. 

2  "  The  following  three  are  attached  to  each  other — proselytes,  slaves, 
and  ravens  "  {Pesachim,  f.  113,  b).  Rabbi  Clielbo  said,  "  Proselytes  are 
as  injurious  to  Israel  as  the  scab  "  (see  my  Life  of  St.  Paul,  i.  666). 


200  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

ing  with  Messianic  expectations  that  even  the  Gentiles 
had  come  to  believe  that  some  one  from  the  East  was 
to  be  Master  of  the  World.  Tlie  Romans  afterwards 
explained  this  prophecy  as  applicable  to  Vespasian ; 
but  Suetonius  tells  us  that  the  Jewish  revolt  was  due 
to  their  understandinjj^  it  in  a  Messianic  sense. ^  The 
air,  too.  was  full  of  prodigies.  A  great  writer  has 
said  that  the  most  terrible  convulsions  of  nature 
have  often  synchronised  with  the  political  catas- 
trophes.^ However  this  may  be,  it  is  certain  that 
events  are  often  influenced  by  the  effect  produced  on 
the  imagination  by  strange  portents  or  uncommon 
appearances.  The  tension  of  men's  minds  among  the 
heathen  made  them  notice  or  imagine  all  sorts  of 
prodigious  births,  storms,  inundations,  comets,  showers 
of  blood,  earthquakes,  strange  effects  of  lightning, 
abnormal  growths  of  trees,  streams  of  meteorites.^  In 
Jerusalem  men  told  how,  at  the  Passover  of  a.d.  65, 
a  mysterious  light  had  gleamed  for  three  hours  at 
midnight  in  the  Holiest  Place ;  how  the  enormous 
gates  of  brass,  which  it  required  the  exertions  of  twenty 
men  to  move,  had  opened  of  themselves,  and  could  not 
be  closed ;  how,  at  Pentecost,  the  priests  had  heard 
sounds  as  of  departing  deities,  who  said  to  each  other, 
"Let  us  depart  hence  ;"^  how 

"  Fierce  fiery  warriors  fought  upon  the  clouds, 
In  rank  and  squadron,  and  right  form  of  war, 
Which  drizzled  blood." 

^  Suet.  Vesp.  4.  "  Pererebuerat  Orieiite  toto  vetus  et  constans  opiniu 
esse  in  fatis  ut  eo  tempore  Judea  profecti  reniiu  potirentur.  Judaei  ad  se 
trahontes  rebellaruiit "  (Jos.  B.  J.  vi.  5,  §  4 ;  Tac.  Hist.  v.  13). 

'  Niebulir.  ^  Suet.  Vesp.  5. 

*  Jos.  B.  J.  ii.  22,  §  1 ;  vi.  5,  §  21 ;  Tac.  H.  v.  13,  and  iu  the 
Talmud. 


TROUBLES    AT    C^SAREA.  201 

"Every  one,"  says  Eenan,  "dreamed  of  presages;  the 
apocalyptic  colour  of  tlie  Jewish  imagination  tinged 
everj^thing  with  an  aureole  of  blood." 

It  seems  to  have  been  the  wicked  object  of  Ges- 
sius  Floras — the  last  of  the  Procurators  of  Judaea — 
to  bring  these  elements  of  rebellion  to  a  head.^  Though 
he  owed  his  appointment  to  the  friendship  of  his  wife, 
Cleopatra,  with  Poppsea,  who,  if  not  a  proselyte,  was 
very  favourable  to  the  Jews,  it  seems  as  if  he  took 
every  step  with  the  intention  of  escaping  from  legal 
enquiries  into  his  own  administration,  by  maddening 
the  Jews  into  acts  which  the  Romans  would  regard  as 
irreparably  criminal.  The  legions  of  Palestine  were 
not  purely  Roman.  They  were  recruited  from  the 
dregs  of  the  provincials,  especially  from  the  Sj-rians 
of  Csesarea  and  the  Samaritans  of  Sebaste,  two  places 
in  which  the  Jews  were  regarded  with  special  anti- 
pathy.^ At  Csesarea  the  population  was  half  Jewish, 
half  Greek  and  Syrian.  Nothing  but  the  Roman 
authority  prevented  these  hostile  nationalities  from 
flying  at  each  other's  throats.  In  a.d.  66  Nero  settled 
their  rivalries  by  giving  the  precedence  to  the  Greeks 
and  Syrians.  A  Greek  immediately  built  a  wall  so 
close  to  the  Jewish  synagogue  that  the  Jews  had 
hardly  room  to  pass.  The  young  Jews  assaulted  the 
workmen,  and  John,  a  Jewish  publican,  gave  Florus 
the  immense  bribe  of  eight  talents  to  j)rohibit  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  building.  Florus  accepted  the  money, 
and,  without  taking  any  step,  went  to  Sebaste.     The 

'  "  Duravit  tamen  patientia  Judaeis  usque  ad  Gess.  Florum  .... 
sub  eo  bellum  ortum  "  (Tac.  H.  v.  10). 

^  "  Ekron  shall  be  rooted  up  "  (Zeph.  ii.  4).  "  This  is  Csesarea,  the 
daughter  of  Edom  (Rome)  "  {Megillah,  f.  6,  a). 


202  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

next  day,  being  the  Sabbath,  some  worthless  Greek, 
ill  order  to  insuk  the  Jews,  turned  up  an  earthen 
pot  near  the  door  of  the  synagogue,  and  began  to 
sacrifice  birds  upon  the  bottom  of  it.  This  was  in- 
tended to  be  a  parody  on  Lev.  xiv.  4,  5,  and  therefore 
an  allusion  "to  the  old  calumny  that  the  Jews  were  a 
nation  of  lepers.^  The  Jews  flew  to  arms,  and  since 
the  Roman  Master  of  the  Horse  could  not  quell  the 
tumult,  they  carried  off  their  sacred  books  to  Narbata. 
When  John  and  twelve  of  the  leading  Jews  went  to 
Sebaste  to  complain  to  Florus,  he  threw  them  into 
prison.  As  though  this  was  not  enough,  he  sent  to 
Jerusalem,  and  demanded  seventeen  talents  from  the 
Corban  treasury  for  the  use  of  the  Emperor.  This 
was  more  than  the  Jews  could  tolerate.  They  not 
only  refused  the  demand,  but  heaped  reproaches  upon 
the  Procurator.  He  set  out  for  Jerusalem,  with  a 
body  of  horse  and  foot,  to  enforce  his  requisition ;  and 
when  the  people  came  forth  to  pay  him  the  customary 
compliment  of  receiving  him  with  a  shout  of  jo}'',  he 
ordered  his  cavalry  to  drive  them  back  into  the  city. 
Next  day,  with  outrageous  insolence,  he  refused  every 
apology  which  was  offered  him,  demanded  the  surrender 
of  those  who  had  reproached  him,  and  scourged  and 
crucified  some  of  the  Jewish  publicans,  though  they 
held  the  rank  of  Roman  knights.  In  these  disturb- 
ances 3,000  Jews  were  slain.  Even  then  the  chief 
citizens  tried  to  calm  the  people,  and  to  hush  the  voice 
of  their  natural  lamentations.  But  Florus  now  bade 
them  all  go  out  and  welcome  with  a  shout  of  joy  two 
cohorts  which  were  advancing  from  Ca)sarea.  To  these 
cohorts  he  had  given  tlie   brutal  order  not  to  return 

1  See  Jos.  c.  Apion.  i.  25 ;  Tac.  II.  v.  4. 


FLORUS    AT    JERUSALEM.  20."^ 

the  shout,  and  to  fall  on  the  Jews,  sword  in  hand,  if 
they  showed  any  signs  of  dissatisfaction.  A  tumult 
naturally  arose,  and  many  of  the  defenceless  Jews 
were  massacred  or  crushed  to  death.  Next  day  the 
people  were  in  open  revolt.  They  drove  back  Floras 
from  the  Temple  into  Antonia,  and  demolished  the 
covered  way,  down  which  it  had  been  the  custom  of 
the  Roman  soldiers  to  rush  when  any  disturbance  arose 
in  the  Temple.  After  these  acts  pardon  was  impos- 
sible, and  Florus,  having  effected  his  infamous  purpose, 
retired  to  Csesarea,  leaving  only  a  single  cohort  in  the 
Castle  of  Antonia. 

The  principal  Jews,  with  the  Queen  Berenice,  then 
went  to  complain  of  Florus  to  Cestius  Gallus,  the 
Legate  of  Syria.  He  sent  Neapolitanus  and  Agrippa 
to  Jerusalem  to  make  enquiries,  and  Agrippa  sincerely 
tried  to  save  the  people  from  rebellion.  They  were 
willing  to  make  every  concession  except  that  of  con- 
tinuing to  obey  Florus.  When  Agrippa  urged  them 
to  do  this,  they  pelted  him  with  stones,  and  drove  him 
from  the  city. 

The  revolt  continued.  Though  occasioned  by  the 
tyranny  of  Florus,  it  was  inspired  by  Messianic  hopes. ^ 
The  strong  fortress  of  Masada  was  seized  by  the 
Zealots,^  and  the  Roman  garrison  was  put  to  the  sword. 
Eleazar,  captain  of  the  Temple,  refused  to  permit  any 
sacrifices  for  the  Emperor.     The  loyal  party,  aided  by 

*  Jos.  B.  J.  vi.  5,  §  4  Josephus  aud  Tacitus  are  almost  our  sole  autho- 
rities for  the  history  of  the  revolt.  Gratz  {Gesch.  d.  Juden.  iii.  331 — 4'14) 
aud  Dereubourg  [Hist,  de  Tal.  255 — 302)  add  a  few  particulars  gleaued 
from  the  Talmud. 

-  The  Zealots  (Kannaim)  were  the  fiercest  aud  most  unscrupulously 
reckless  of  the  uational  party.  Tliey  were  chiefly  Galilaeaus.  Simou  the 
Apostle  was  a  Kananite — i.e.,  a  Zealot. 


204  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

.'^,000  Batanean  horsemen,  sent  them  by  Agrippa,  could 
only  command  the  upper  city,  and  this  was  stormed 
after  a  few  days  by  the  Zealots  and  Sicarii,  who  burnt 
the  palaces  of  Agrippa,  Berenice,  and  the  High  Priest 
Ananias.  Two  days  after — on  July  5,  a.d.  66 — they 
took  the  tower  of  Antonia,  and  though  they  had 
sworn  to  let  the  Roman  garrison  depart,  they  massacred 
the  whole  cohort  with  the  exception  of  their  head  cen- 
turion, Metilius,  who  basely  purchased  his  life  by 
accepting  circumcision.  The  High  Priest  Ananias  was 
dragged  out  of  his  place  of  concealment,  a  sewer  of  the 
Asmonjcan  Palace,  and  was  murdered-  By  the  end  of 
September,  66,  Jerusalem  was  in  the  hands  of  the 
rebels.  The  Romans  in  the  strong  fortress  of 
Macha?rus  capitulated.  Cypros  was  taken.  In  five 
months  the  whole  of  Palestine — Judaea,  Peraea,  Galilee, 
and  even  Idumaa — was  in  open  rebellion  against  the 
Roman  Empire- 
Then  began  that  internecine  war  of  races — that 
horrible  "  epidemic  of  massacre " — which  is  unparal- 
leled in  the  whole  of  historj^  The  rebellion  failed 
chiefly  because  of  the  hatred  with  which  the  Jews 
had  inspired  the  Syrians.  In  Caesarea  the  Greeks 
and  Sj-rians  attacked  the  Jews,  and  massacred  them 
to  the  number  of  20,000  ;  while  Florus  seized  the 
few  that  had  escaped  and  sent  them  to  the  galleys.  The 
Jews  avenged  themselves  by  massacring  the  Syrians 
in  Philadelphia,  Heshbon,  Gerasa,  Pella,  Scythopolis, 
and  other  towns ;  and  by  laying  waste  with  sword 
and  fire  every  city  and  village  which  they  could  seize 
in  Decapolis,  Gaulonitis,  Samaria,  and  the  maritime 
plain.  The  Syrians  took  fearful  reprisals  at  Ascalon, 
Ptolemais,    Tyre,   Hippo,    and   Gadara.     The    madness 


EPIDEMIC    OF    MASSACRE.  205 

spread  even  to  Alexandria.  The  Prsefect  at  that  time 
was  the  apostate  Jew,  Tiberius  Alexander,  a  nephew 
of  Philo.  The  quarrel  broke  out  when  the  population 
were  assembled  in  the  huge  wooden  amphitheatre. 
Insulted  by  the  Greeks,  the  Jews  hurled  stones  at 
their  adversaries,  and  seized  torches  to  set  fire  to  the 
amphitheatre,  and  involve  the  whole  population  in 
destruction.  Unable  to  stop  them  in  any  other 
way,  Tiberius  let  loose  17,000  soldiers  upon  them, 
and  50,000  Jews  were  slain.  Before  the  year  was 
ended  there  was  another  horrible  plot  of  massacre  at 
Damascus,  and  10,000  Jews,  unarmed  and  defenceless, 
were  shamefully  butchered  by  their  fellow  citizens. 
Early  in  the  next  year,  the  streets  of  Antioch  also 
were  deluged  with  Jewish  blood. 

Cestius  Grallus  now  marched  southward  with 
Agrippa,  at  the  head  of  a  considerable  force,  to  quell 
the  rebellion.  Conflagration  and  massacre  marked  his 
path.  Zabulon,  Joppa,  Narbatene,  Mount  Asamon, 
Lydda,  were  the  scenes  of  various  tragedies.  In  October 
he  arrived  at  Gribeon.  Though  it  was  the  Sabbath, 
the  Jews,  with  whom  intense  zeal  supplied  the  place 
of  skill  and  discipline,  rushed  to  encounter  him,  and 
killed  515  men,  with  the  loss  of  only  twenty-two  on 
their  own  side,  while  the  rear  of  the  Eomaus  was 
harassed  by  Simon  Bar  Giora.  Of  the  ambassadors 
sent  by  Agrippa  to  appeal  to  the  Jews,  one  was  killed, 
the  other  wounded.  All  hope  of  peace  being  now  at 
an  end,  on  October  30,  Cestius  advanced  to  Scopus,  at 
the  north  of  Jerusalem,  seized  Bezetha,  fired  the  timber 
market,  and  drove  the  rebels  within  the  second  wall. 
If  he  had  shown  the  least  courage  and  resolution,  he 
might  now    without  difficulty  have  taken   the   city  by 


206  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

assault,  and  ended  the  war,  for  large  numbers  of  the 
peaceful  citizens  were  ready  to  open  the  gates  to  him. 
His  irresolution  and  cowardice  frustrated  their  plans. 
Even  when  he  was  on  the  verge  of  success  he  so  un- 
accountably sounded  a  retreat,  that  the  Zealots,  in  a 
fury  of  reviving  hope,  chased  him  first  to  Scopus, 
thence  to  Gibeon,  and  finally  inflicted  upon  him  a 
desperate  defeat  at  the  famous  path  of  Bethhoron, 
over  which,  in  old  days,  Joshua  had  uplifted  his 
spear  to  bid  the  sun  "  stand  still  upon  Gibeon,  and 
thou  moon  in  the  valley  of  Ajalon."  Cestius  left  5,300 
footmen  and  380  horsemen  dead  upon  the  field,  lost 
an  eagle,  and,  flying  to  Antipatris,  left  behind  him 
the  military  engines  which  the  Jews  afterwards  turned 
to  such  good  account  against  the  besiegers  of  Jerusalem. 
The  sheep,  as  in  the  Book  of  Enoch,  were  now  armed 
to  do  battle  against  the  wolves.  The  Legate  died  soon 
after,  weary  of  a  life  which  had  suffered  so  severe  a 
shame. 

The  defeat  of  Cestius  took  place  in  November,  OG. 
When  the  news  of  it  reached  Nero  in  Greece,  even 
the  supreme  folly  and  disgrace  of  his  daily  proceedings 
did  not  prevent  him  from  realising  the  gravity  of  the 
crisis.  He  saw  that  an  able  general  was  necessary  to 
recover  the  country,  which  he  had  been  taught  by 
soothsayers  to  regard  as  his  future  Empire.^  He  had 
such  a  general  in  Vespasian,  whose  humble  origin  and 
plebeian  surroundings  secured  him  from  jealousy. 
Vespasian  was  then  in  disgrace,  for  having  gone  to 
sleep  or  yawned  while  Nero  was  singing.  When  the 
messenger  came  to  announce  his  elevation  to  the  post 

1  Suet.  {Ner.  40) :    "  Spoponderant  tamen  quidam  destituto  ei  ordina- 
tionem  Orientis,  nonnulli  nominatim  regnum  Hierosolymorum." 


JOSEPHUS.  207 

of  commander-in-chief  of  the  Judsean  legions,  Vespasian 
thought  that  he  was  the  bearer  of  a  death-warrant 
from  the  imperial  buffoon.  But  accepting  the  proffered 
command,  he  at  once  took  vigorous  measures,  and  was 
ably  seconded  by  Titus,  his  son. 

Meanwhile — though  it  was  clear  from  the  first  that 
the  revolt  was  foredoomed  to  defeat,  and  that  the  rebels 
would  drag  nation  and  city  and  Temple  to  destruction 
— even  serious  citizens  were  swept  away  by  the  tide  of 
frenzied  enthusiasm.  They  may  have  thought  that 
the  only  way  to  control  the  revolt  was  to  range  them- 
selves at  the  head  of  it.  The  city  was  placed  under 
the  younger  Han  an  and  Joseph  Ben  Gorion.  The 
country  was  divided  into  military  districts.  Gamala 
and  Galilee  were  assigned  to  the  protection  of  the 
historian  Josephus. 

It  was  on  him,  and  the  forces  under  his  command, 
that  the  first  shock  of  battle  fell.  Vespasian  had 
formed  the  plan  of  conquering  the  country  in  detail, 
and  of  driving  the  defeated  population  southwards  in 
disorderly  masses  towards  Jerusalem,  where  he  hoped 
that  famine  would  expedite  the  work  of  war.  He 
started  from  Antioch  in  March,  a.d.  67.  Then  once 
more  began  the  bath  of  blood  for  the  hapless  race. 
Josephus,  though  he  displayed  both  genius  and  courage, 
and  was  the  nominal  general  of  "more  than  100,000 
young  men,^ "  was  hindered  by  want  of  cavalry,  and 
hampered  by  the  rashness,  treachery,  and  opposition  of 
followers,  from  whom  his  very  life  was  often  in  danger. 
Gadara  was  the  first  city  to  fall.     There,  as  well  as  in 

^  So  he  says  {B.  J.  ii.  20,  §  6) ;  but  perhaps  his  numbers  would  bear 
dividing  by  ten  at  least,  and  his  items  {id.  §  8)  seem  only  to  amount  to 
65,350. 


2D8  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

the  surrounding  villages,  men,  women,  and  children 
were  indiscriminately  slain.  For  forty-six  days  Josephus 
defended  Jotapata.  On  the  forty-seventh  it  was  be- 
trayed. Forty  thousand  Jews  had  fallen  in  the  siege ; 
1,200  were  made  prisoners  ;  the  city  was  committed  to 
the  flames.  At  Ascalon  10,000  Jews  were  slaughtered. 
At  Japha  27,000  were  killed,  and  the  women  and  chil- 
dren were  sold  into  slavery.  On  Mount  Gerizim  many 
Samaritans  perished  of  thirst,  and  11,600  fell  before  the 
soldiers  of  Celearis.  At  Joppa,  8,400  had  been  slain 
by  Cestius  and  the  city  burnt.  But  a  number  of  fugitives 
had  ensconced  themselves  in  the  ruins,  and  were  living 
by  piracy  and  brigandage.  These  Jews  fled  to  their  ships 
before  the  advance  of  the  E-oman  soldiers.  Next  morning 
a  storm  burst  on  them,  and,  after  a  frightful  scene  of 
despair,  4,200  were  drowned,  and  their  corpses  were 
washed  upon  the  shore.  Tarichese  was  a  strongly- 
fortified  city  on  the  shores  of  Lake  Tiberias.  It  was 
taken  by  Titus,  and  6,000  Jews  dyed  with  their  blood 
the  waters  of  that  crystal  sea.  Titus  had  promised 
safety  to  the  inhabitants,  but  in  spite  of  this  2,200  of 
the  aged  and  the  young  were  massacred  in  the  Gymna- 
sium ;  6,000  of  the  strongest  were  sent  to  Nero  to  dig 
through  the  Isthmus  of  Corinth;  and  30,400  citizens 
of  this  and  neighbouring  cities,  including  some  whom 
Vespasian  had  given  to  Agrippa,  were  sold  as  slaves. 

After  this  dreadful  experience,  nearly  the  whole 
district  submitted  to  the  conqueror.  Gamala,  however, 
still  resisted.  It  was  deemed  impregnable  by  its 
citizens,  since  it  was  built  at  the  top  of  a  mountain, 
accessible  only  by  one  path,  which  was  intersected  by 
a  deep  ditch.  Agrippa  besieged  it  for  seven  months 
in    vain.       Then   Vespasian    invested    it.       Pressed    by 


GAMALA    AND    GISCALA.  209 

liunger,  of  which  maii}^  died,  some  of  the  citizens 
climbed  down  the  precipice,  or  escaped  through  the 
sewers.  At  last,  aided  by  a  storm,  the  Romans  took 
it  on  October  28,  a.d.  67.  Once  more  there  was  a 
fearful  slaughter.  Two  w^omen  alone  escaped ;  4,000 
were  slain  in  the  defence ;  5,000  flung  themselves 
down  the  precipices ;  all  the  rest — even  the  women 
and  children — were  cut  to  pieces  or  thrown  down  the 
rocks. 

Mount  Tabor,  which  Josephus  had  fortified,  still 
held  out.  Placidus  drew  away  some  of  its  defenders  by 
a  feigned  flight,  and  the  rest  were  driven  to  surrender 
from  want  of  water.  We  are  not  informed  of  the 
number  of  the  slain. 

Griscala,  the  native  city  of  the  Zealot  John,  was  the 
last  to  succumb.  John  fled  from  it  with  his  adherents, 
and  in  the  pursuit  of  them  by  the  troops  of  Titus, 
6,000  women  and  children  were  slain. 

After  this  the  Eoman  generals  led  their  troops  into 
winter  quarters,  postponing  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  till 
the  following  year.  But  this  respite  brought  no  peace 
to  the  miserable  and  polluted  city.  John  of  Giscala, 
escaping  to  Jerusalem,  excused  his  flight  by  sa3dng 
that  it  was  not  worth  while  to  defend  other  cities  so 
long  as  the  Jews  possessed  such  a  stronghold  as  Jeru- 
salem, which  the  Romans,  unless  they  made  themselves 
wings,  could  never  reach.  By  such  boastings  he  fired 
the  audacity  of  the  young  and  the  fanatical.  Brigand- 
age increased  on  all  sides,  and  the  Zealots  were  guilty 
of  such  atrocities  that  many  preferred  to  throw  them- 
selves on  the  mercy  of  the  Romans.  By  night  and 
by  day,  openly  and  in  secret,  murder,  pillage,  and 
every   form    of  crime  raged   in   the  Holy  City.      The 

0 


210  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

rich  and  noble  were  seized  in  multitudes  on  the  false 
charge  of  treachery,  and  were  put  to  death,  partly  to 
get  rid  of  their  authorit}^  partl}^  to  plunder  their 
goods.  For  the  purpose  of  humiliating  the  priests, 
it  was  pretended  that  the  High  Priest  ought  to  be 
chosen  by  lot,  and  they  thrust  into  the  venerable 
office  a  poor  peasant,  who  was  totally  ignorant  of 
the  necessary  duties.  Hanan  the  Younger,  a  man  of 
great  courage  and  of  high  authority,  because  he  and 
his  family  had  long  been  the  wealthiest  and  most 
eminent  of  the  High  Priests,  made  one  more  attempt  to 
rouse  the  wretched  citizens  against  this  brutal  tyranny, 
which,  in  the  name  of  religion  and  patriotism,  was 
guilt}^  of  the  most  awful  crimes.  To  the  last,  and  to 
the  utmost  of  his  power,  he  was  true  to  the  traditional 
policy  of  his  house,  which  was  so  to  act  that  "  the 
Eomans  might  not  come  and  take  away  their  place 
and  nation."^  It  was  for  this  reason  only  that  he 
had  so  far  yielded  as  to  give  an  apparent  sanction  to 
the  revolt.  But  he  was  as  little  able  to  stay  the 
shocks  of  the  subsequent  earthquake  as  Mirabeau  or 
Lafayette  to  stem  the  course  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion. When  these  tremendous  outbreaks  have  fairly 
begun,  their  issues  alwaj^s  belong  to  the  most  violent. 
The  Zealots  were  the  Montagnards  of  the  Jewish  revolt. 
John  of  Giscala,  while  he  swore  a  most  solemn  oath 
that  he  was  faithful  to  the  party  of  moderation,  be- 
trayed all  their  plans  to  the  Zealots.  A  combat  ensued, 
in  which  the  party  of  Hanan  succeeded  in  driving  the 
Zealots  into  the  inner  courts  of  the  Temple.     Then,  at 

^  John  xi.  48 — 50;  xviii.  14.  Josophus,  with  liis  usual  uiitrustworthi- 
ness  where  he  had  any  purpose  to  serve,  directly  coutradiots  himself  as  to 
the  character  of  Hauau  (B.  J.  iv.  3,  §  7 ;   Vit.  39). 


ZEALOTS    AND    IDUMEANS.  211 

the  instigation  of  Jolm,  the  Zealots  introduced  3,000 
Idumeans  into  the  city,  by  sawing  through  the  bars 
of  the  city  gates,  on  a  night  of  such  violent  storm  that 
they  were  not  heard  or  suspected.  The  Idumeans, 
once  admitted,  began  to  massacre  the  people.  When 
their  presence  was  discovered,  a  wild  wail  of  terror 
rang  through  the  night,  and  many  of  Hanan's  party 
flung  themselves  in  despair  from  the  walls  and  porticos 
of  the  Temple.  The  massacre  was  continued  in  the 
city.  Zealots  and  Idumeans  scourged  and  tortured  the 
most  eminent  citizens,  and  murdered  the  wealthy 
Zachariah,  the  son  of  Baruch,  under  circumstances  of 
peculiar  brutality.^  They  not  only  killed  Hanan  the 
Younger,  and  Jesus  son  of  Gamala,  but,  with  unheard- 
of  ruthlessness,  stripped  naked  the  bodies  of  these 
venerable  priests,  and  flung  them  forth  unburied  to  be 
devoured  by  dogs  and  jackals. 

The  scenes  enacted  at  Jerusalem  during  this  year, 
A.D.  68,  and  the  year  following,  may  perhaps  be  faintly 
paralleled  by  the  worst  orgies  of  the  Eeign  of  Terror, 
but  far  exceeded  them  in  stark  and  irredeemable 
wickedness.  The  Idumeans,  says  Josephus,  "  fell 
upon  the  people  as  a  flock  of  profane  animals,  and 
cut  their  throats."  It  was  not  long  before  they  were 
so  gorged  with  plunder,  so  sated  with  blood,  so  sick 
of  their  own  brutalities,  that  with  a  qualm  of  self- 
disgust  they  expressed  repentance,  opened  the  prisons 
which  they  had  themselves  filled,  and,  leaving  the  city, 
joined  Simon,  the  son  of  Giora.  But  the  Zealots  did 
not  pause  for  a  moment  in  their  work  of  horror.  They 
murdered  Gorion,  and  Niger  of  Perea,  and  every  noble 

^  In  Matt,  xxiii.  35,  "  Son  of  Baracliias,"  is  probably  an  ancient  but 
mistaken  gloss  (see  luy  Life  of  Christ,  ii.  p.  246,  «.)• 

0  2 


212  THE   EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

citizen  that  was  left.  They  sold  to  the  rich  permission 
to  fly,  and  murdered  all  who  attempted  to  escape 
without  bribing  them.  Vespasian  and  his  soldiers 
were  glad  to  look  on  and  see  these  infatuated  wretches 
do  the  work  of  their  Roman  enemies.  Mercy  seemed 
to  be  dead.  All  the  streets  of  the  city,  all  the  roads 
about  the  city,  were  heaped  with  unburied  corpses, 
which  putrefied  in  the  sun.  Brigands  and  sicarii 
raged  uncontrolled,  and  the  Zealots,  who  had  seized 
Masada,  attacked  the  town  of  Engedi,  murdered 
more  than  700  women  and  children,  pillaged  the  town, 
and  terrorised  the  whole  coast  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

Such  was  the  state  of  things  when  the  campaign 
reopened  in  the  spring  of  68.  The  first  task  of  Ves- 
pasian was  to  seize  Gadara.  At  Bethennabris  there 
was  another  slaughter.  Placidus  pursued  the  fugitive 
Jews  to  Jericho.  It  happened  that  at  this  time  the 
Jordan  was  in  flood.  Such  multitudes  were  drowned 
that  the  river  and  the  Dead  Sea  were  filled  with  corpses, 
as  the  Sea  of  Galilee  had  been  after  the  siege  of  Tari- 
chea.  Thirteen  thousand  were  left  dead  upon  the  field  ; 
2,200  were  taken  prisoners.  Every  other  Perean  town 
which  offered  resistance  was  taken.  Those  who  took 
refuge  in  boats  on  the  Dead  Sea  were  chased  and  slain. 
On  the  eastern  bank  of  the  Jordan  Machserus  alone 
remained  in  the  hands  of  the  rebels. 

The  reader  may  now  understand  something  of  the 
force  of  the  expression  in  the  Apocalypse,  that  when  the 
vintage  of  the  land  was  trodden,  the  blood  without  the 
city  rolled  in  a  torrent,  bridle  deep,  for  a  distance  of 
1,600  furlongs.^  The  length  of  the  Holy  Land,  from 
Dan   to    Beersheba,    is    189    miles;    but   over    a   still 

1  Rev.  xiv.  19,  20. 


VESPASIAN.  213 

larger  area,  from  Tyre — nay,  even  from  Damascus 
— in  tlie  north,  to  Engedi  in  the  south,  the  whole 
country  had  been  scathed  with  fire  and  drowned 
in  blood.  The  expression  of  the  seer  would  hardly 
seem  an  hyperbole  to  one  who  had  seen  the  foul  red 
stains  which  had  polluted  the  silver  Lake  of  Gen- 
nesareth ;  the  Jordan  choked  with  putrefying  corpses ; 
even  the  waves  of  the  Dead  Sea  rendered  loathlier  than 
their  wont  with  the  carcases  of  the  countless  slain.  No 
one  could  witness,  no  one  could  think  of  those  un- 
sparing massacres  without  having  his  eyes  dimmed,  as  it 
were,  with  a  mist  of  blood.  "  For  seven  years,"  says 
the  Talmud,  "  did  the  nations  of  the  world  cultivate 
their  vineyards  with  no  other  manure  than  the  blood 
of  Israel."^ 

But  in  truth  when  we  read  the  Jewish  annals  of 
these  years,  we  never  seem  to  have  reached  the  cumulus 
of  horrors.  It  was  in  vain  that — even  after  he  seemed 
to  have  drawn  round  Jerusalem  his  "  circle  of  exter- 
mination " — Vespasian  was  called  away  from  the  scene. 
He  arrived  at  Jericho  on  June  3,  a.d.  68,  but  his  at- 
tention was  at  once  diverted  into  an  entirely  different 
direction.  Vindex  revolted  from  Nero  on  March  15  ; 
Gralba  on  April  3  ;  the  Praetorians  revolted  on  June  8 ; 
on  June  9  Nero  committed  suicide.  Vespasian  had 
been  flattered  by  dreams  and  prognostications  of  future 
Empire,  to  which  his  ears  were  always  open.  Up  to 
this  time,  however,  he  had  not  committed  himself,  and 
he  now  sent  Titus  with  Agrippa  to  salute  Galba  as 
his  legitimate  Emperor.  Before  they  arrived,  the  news 
came  that  on  January  2,  a.d.  69,  Vitellius  had  been 
proclaimed  Emperor  by  the   legions  of  Germany,  and 

1  Gittin,  f.  57  a. 


214  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

that  on  January  15  Galba  had  been  murdered,  and 
Otho  proclaimed  by  the  Praetorians.  Vespasian  was 
not  prepared  to  acknowledge  either  Otho  or  Vitellius. 
He  paused  in  his  warlike  operations  to  watch  the  course 
of  events.  But  the  doomed  and  miserable  land,  and 
the  yet  more  doomed  and  miserable  city,  were  far  from 
profiting  by  this  respite.  It  seemed  as  if  the  Zealots 
were  now  drunken  with  blood  and  fury.  Simon,  son 
of  Giora,  had  got  together  an  army  of  slaves  and  cut- 
throats, and  was  spreading  terror  far  and  wide.  He 
conquered  the  Idumeans,  and  desolated  their  country 
with  fire  and  sword.  He  repelled  an  attack  of  the 
Zealots,  and  drove  them  back  into  Jerusalem.  When, 
by  a  stratagem,  they  had  captured  his  wiie,  he  seized 
all  who  came  out  of  the  city,  cut  off  their  hands,  sent 
them  back,  and  threatened  to  treat  every  one  of  the 
citizens  in  the  same  way,  if  his  wife  were  not  restored 
to  him.  Power  was  given  to  the  mystic  rider  of  the 
Eed  Horse,  says  St.  John,  "  to  take  peace  from  the 
earth,  and  that  men  should  slay  one  another."^  Civil 
war  raged  within  and  without  the  city  with  such  fury, 
that  the  Eoraans  almost  appeared  in  the  guise  of  friends. 
All  who  attempted  to  fly  from  Simon  were  murdered 
by  John  ;  all  the  fugitives  of  John  were  murdered  by 
Simon.  At  last,  in  despair  at  the  tyranny  of  John,  the 
people  admitted  Simon  within  the  w^alls.  The  only 
difference  was  that  they  had  now  two  tyrants  instead 
of  one.  John  and  his  Zealots  were  confined  to  the 
Temple,  and  were  the  fewer  in  number ;  but  from  its 
height  and  impregnable  position  they  were  enabled  to 
make  sallies,  and  to  hurl  down  upon  their  enemies  from 
the  captured  engines  of  the  Romans,  a  perfect  hail  of 

^  Rev.  vi.  4. 


HORRORS    AT    JERUSALEM.  215 

missiles.     In  the  incessant  collision  between  the  hostile 
factions,   all  the   houses  in    the  neighbourhood   of  the 
Temple  were  burnt  down.      It   was  surrounded  by  a 
chaos  of  blackened   ruins,   in    which  unburied    corpses 
bred  pestilence  in   the  summer  noon.      Not  only  the 
streets,  but   even  the  courts  and  altar  of  the  Temple 
constantly  swam  in  blood.      Priest  and  pilgrim  mingled 
their  blood     with    their    sacrifices,   smitten     down    by 
balistse    or    catapults    as   they  stood   beside   the  altar. 
Their   feet   were    soiled,    so   that   they  polluted   every 
corner    of   the   holy  precincts    with  stej)s  encrimsoned 
by  the  uncleansed  pools  of  gore,  which  told  the  tale  of 
daily  slaughter.    Every  semblance  of  performing  the  rites 
of  religion  was  reduced  to  the  most  monstrous  mockery. 
It  was  impossible  that  men  could  breathe  this  reeking 
atmosphere  of  blood  and  crime,  in  which  every  brain 
seemed  to  reel  with  the  hideous  intoxication,  without  a 
total  collapse  of  the  moral  sense.    At  the  very  time  that 
the   Zealots  were  representing  themselves  as  the   God- 
protected  champions  of  a  cause  the  most  sacred  in  the 
world,  they  had  become   so  dead  to  every  precept   of 
religion,  that,  putting  on  the  robes   and   ornaments  of 
women,  decking  their   hair,  painting  underneath  their 
eyes,    but    carrying    swords    under   their    gay   female 
apparel,    they    plunged    headlong   into    such    nameless 
obscenities,  that  it  seemed  as  if  the  city  had  become 
not  only  a  slaughter-house,  and  a  robbers'    cave,  but 
a  very  cage  of  unclean  beasts,  fit  only  to  be  taken  and 
destroyed.       "  How    is   the  faithful    city   become    an 
harlot!     It  was  full  of  justice!     Eighteousness  lodged 
in  her,  but  now  murderers."^     Very  early,  amid  these 
scenes   of   horror,    it  must   have   been    evident  to  the 

1  Isa.  i.  21. 


216  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

little  Christian  community,  that  "  the  abominable  wing 
that  maketh  desolate,"^  was  standing  in  the  Holy 
Place,  which  was  now  more  shamelessly  defiled  than 
any  shrine  of  Moloch  or  Baal  Peor.  Well  might  they 
recognise  that  the  city  which  was  known  as  "  the  Holy, 
the  Noble,"  was  "  spiritually  called  Sodom  and  Egypt, 
where  also  their  Lord  was  crucified."^ 


Thus  horrible  was  the  aspect  of  the  Avorld — politi- 
cally, morally,  socially,  even  phj'sicall}^ — during  the 
months  in  which  the  Apocalypse  was  written.  Fhysi- 
callij  men  seemed  to  be  tormented  and  terrified  with 
catastrophes  and  portents.  "  Besides  the  manifold 
changes  and  chances  of  human  affairs,"  says  Tacitus, 
"  there  were  prodigies  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  the 
warnings  of  lightnings,  and  the  presages  of  the  future, 
now  joyous,  now  gloomy,  now  obscure,  now  unmis- 
takable. For  never  was  it  rendered  certain  b}^  clearer 
indications,  or  by  more  deadly  massacres  of  the  Eoman 
people,  that  the  gods  care  nothing  for  our  happiness, 
but  do  care  for  our  retribution."^  In  Rome  a  j)esti- 
lence  had  carried  off  tens  of  thousands  of  the  citizens. 
A  disastrous  inundation  of  the  Tiber  had  impeded  the 
march  of  Otho's  troops,  and  encumbered  the  roads 
with  ruins."*  In  Lydia  an  encroachment  of  the  sea 
had  wrought  fearful  havoc.  In  Asia  city  after  city 
had  been  shattered  to  the  dust  by  earthquakes.^     "  The 

1  Dan.  ix.  27;  xi.  31;  xii.  11;  Matt.  xxiv.  1.5;  Mark  xiii.  It. 

2  Rev.  xi.  8.  ■■'  Tac.  B.  i.  3.  *  Tac.  11.  i.  86. 

^  Eusiihius  (Chron.  A.D.  17)  Tnontions  Ephesus,  Magiiosia,  Savdis, 
^gae,  Pliiladelpliia.  Tmolns,  Apollnnia,  Dia,  &o.  In  tlio  third  hook  of 
the  Sibyllines  (iii.  337 — 366)  many  otliors  aro  mentioned. 


STATE    OF    THE    WORLD.  217 

world  itself  is  being  shaken  to  pieces,"  says  Seneca, 
"and  there  is  universal  consternation."^  Comets, 
eclipses,  meteors,  parhelions,  terrified  the  ignorant, 
and  were  themselves  the  pretexts  for  imperial  cruelties.^ 
Auroras  tinged  the  sky  with  blood.  Volcanos  seemed, 
like  Vesuvius,  to  be  waking  to  new  fury.^  Morally, 
the  state  of  the  Pagan  world  was  such  as  we  have 
seen.  It  was  sunk  so  low  that,  in  the  opinion  of  the 
Pagan  moralists  of  the  empire,  posterity  could  but 
imitate  and  could  not  surpass  such  a  virulence  of 
degradation.  The  state  of  the  Jewish  world  is  re- 
vealed alike  in  the  Gospels,  in  the  Talmud,  and  in 
the  writings  of  Josephus.  It  may  suffice  to  quote 
the  opinion  of  the  latter  that  his  own  generation  in 
Judea  was  the  wickedest  that  the  world  had  seen,  and 
that  if  the  avenging  sword  of  the  Pomans  had  not 
smitten  Jerusalem  with  Grod's  vengeance,  the  very 
earth  must  have  opened  to  swallow  up  her  iniquities. 
Socially,  we  see  how  desperate  was  the  condition 
alike  of  Jews  and  Pagans,  in  St.  Paul,  St.  James,  and 
Josephus  on  the  one  hand,  and  in  Tacitus,  Suetonius, 
and  the  Satirists  on  the  other.  Politically,  the  whole 
empire  was  in  a  state  of  agitation.  That  the  sacred 
sun  of  the  Julii  should  set  in  a  sea  of  blood  seemed  an 
event  frightfully  ominous,  while,  owing  to  the  obscurity 
which  hung  about  the  death  of  Nero,  and  the  very 
small  number  of  those  who  had  seen  his  corpse,  and 
the  prophecies  which  had  always  been  current  about  his 
complete  restoration,  not  only  was  there  a  universal 
belief  that  he  would  return,  but  as  early  as  the  end 
of  A.D,   G8    a  false  Nero  gained  many  adherents,  and 

1  Sen.  Nat.  Qu.  vi.  1.  -  Suet.  Ner.  36. 

■*  Tac.  Ann.  xv.  22. 


218  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

caused  wide-spread  alarm. ^  The  election  of  Galba  by 
the  legions  of  Spain  seemed  to  divulge  a  secret  full 
of  disaster — the  fact  that  an  emperor  could  be  created 
elsewhere  than  at  Rome.  Emperor  after  emperor  died 
by  suicide  or  by  the  hands  of"  assassins. 

"  In  outlines  dim  and  vast 
Their  fearful  shadows  cast 

The  giant  forms  of  Empires  on  their  way 
To  ruin  ; — one  by  one 
They  tower,   and   they  are  gone — " 

The  Eomish  world  and  the  Jewish  world  were  alike 
rent  by  civil  war.  There  were  banquets  in  the  reign 
of  Nero  at  which  seven  emperors  and  the  father  of  an 
eighth — for  the  most  part  entirely  unrelated  to  one 
another — might  have  met  under  the  same  roof,  namely 
Nero,  Galba,  Otho,  Vitellius,  Vespasian,  Titus,  Domi- 
tian,  Nerva,  and  the  elder  Trajan;^  and  five  of  these, 
if  not  six,  died  violent  deaths.  Every  general  of  the 
smallest  eminence  became  ambitious  to  raise  himself 
to  "the  dread  summits  of  Caesarian  power. "^  Vindex, 
Nymphidius,  Galba,  Vitellius,  A^espasian,  Claudius 
Macer  in  Africa,  Fonteius  Capito  in  Germany,  Betuus 
Chilo  in  Gaul,  Obultronius  and  Cornelius  Sabiniis  in 
Spain,  were  all  seized  with  the  vertigo  of  this  ambi- 
tion ;  while  the  generals  who  helped  their  various 
attempts — such  as  Caecina,  Valens,  Mucianus,  Antonius 
Primus — became  themselves  the  objects  of  jealousy  and 
suspicion.  More  than  once  the  soldiers  had  serious 
thoughts  of  murdering  all  the  senators,  in  order  to 
keep  the  whole  government  of  the  world  in  their  own 
hands.*     Almost  alone    among   the   crowd   of   military 

1  Suet.  Ner.  40,  57.  '  Reuan,  UAntechHst,  p.  481. 

3  See  Merivale,  Hist  vi.  374.        *  Tac.  H.  i.  80 ;  Dion.  Cass.  Ixiv.  9. 


MASSACRE    AT    BEDRIACUM.  219 

chieftains  Virginius  stood  superior  to  these  dreams  of 
usurpation,  and  when  he  died  peacefully,  full  of  years 
and  honours,  he  deserved  the  proud  epitaph  which  he 
engraved  upon  his  tomb,  that  he,  when  Vindex  was 
defeated,^  "  claimed  the  Empire  not  for  himself  but  for 
his  country."^  The  fatal  results  of  consular  ambition 
might  be  seen  on  the  field  of  Bedriacum.  There  the 
very  roads  were  obstructed  with  the  mounds  of  the  dead, 
and  the  massacre  was  all  the  more  deadly  because 
Romans  could  not  be  sold  as  slaves,  so  that  no  one  on 
either  side  was  tempted  to  pause  from  slaughter  in  the 
hope  of  booty.  After  a  desperate  hand-to-hand  con- 
flict between  Romans  and  Romans,  which  heaped  the 
field  with  an  almost  incredible  number  of  the  slain,^  "  the 
soldiers  fell  sobbing  into  one  another's  arms,  and  all 
denounced  in  common  the  wickedness  of  civil  war." 
Amid  portents  so  threatening  and  scenes  so  terrible, 
it  is  not  strange  that  the  hearts  of  men  should  have 
been  failing  them  for  fear.  There  had  been  for  many 
years  an  all  but  universal  impression  that  the  days  of 
Rome  were  numbered.  It  had  probably  originated 
from  the  expectations  of  Jews  and  Christians,  and  is 
found  again  and  again  in  the  Sibylline  books.*  In 
Dion  Cassius  we  read  that  a  proverb  was  prevalent 
that  when  thrice  three  hundred  years  had  passed,  or  in 
the  beginning  of  the  tenth  century  since  Rome  was 
founded,   she    should  perish.^     It  was  even  sung  as   a 

1     "  Hie  situs  est  Rufus,  pulso  qui  Viudice  quondam, 

Imperium  asseruit  non  sibi  sed  patrise." — (Pliu.  Ep.  vi.  10.) 

2  Tac.  H.  ii.  44. 

^  Dion  Cassiiis  (Ixiv.  10)  mentions  tlie  fearful  but  most  improbable  total 
of  400,000  {Tfffffapes  fj.vpiciSes).     Tacitus  {H.  ii.  44)  calls  it  a  strages. 
*  Orac.  Sibyll.  ii.  15,  19;  iii.  46—59;  vii.  111—112,  &c. 
5  Dion  Cass.  Ivii.  18 ;  Ixii.  18. 


220  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

song  in  tlie  streets,  that  after  tlirice  three  hundred 
years  internal  sedition  should  destroy  the  Romans ;  and 
at  a  later  period,  the  line  "  Last  of  the  descendants  of 
iEneas,  a  matricide  shall  reign,"  was  on  everybody's 
lips.  "  Rome  shall  be  ruins,"  says  one  of  the  Sibyllists, 
writing  long  before  the  Apocalypse.  The  calculations 
of  that  Jewish  form  of  Kabbalism  whicli  was  known 
as  Gemafria — or  the  substitution  of  numerical  values 
for  words — led  the  writers  of  the  Sibyllines  to  notice 
that  the  numerical  value  of  the  letters  of  Rome  was 
948,  and  they  therefore  prophesied  that  in  that  year 
Rome  should  be  destroyed.^  They  thought  that  Nero 
would  awake  from  the  dead  to  accomplish  this  ven- 
geance ;  and  that  "  dark  blood  should  mark  the  track 
of  the  Beast."'"  The  Sibyls,  says  Lactantius,  "  say 
openly  that  Rome  shall  perisli,  and  that  by  the  judg- 
ment of  God."^  The  topic  of  them  all  is,  in  prophetic 
language,  "  The  burden  of  Rome." 

And  amid  all  these  evils — these  multiplied  signs 
of  the  approaching  end — the  "  woes  of  the  Messiali " 
afflicted  the  Church  also.  Two  of  the  greatest  cities 
of  the  world — Rome,  the  spiritual  Babylon,  Jerusalem, 
the  spiritual  Sodom — had  drunk  deep  of  the  blood  of 
the  prophets  and  saints  of  Christ.  Nor  had  the  guilt 
of  such  murders  been  confined  to  them.  "  Through 
all  the  provinces "  it  seemed  as  if  Satan  had  come 
down  having  great  wrath,  as  knowing  that  his  time 
was  short.  Many  a  nameless  martyr  in  the  various 
cities  of  the  Empire  had  been  added  to  that  "vast 
multitude,"  who,  in  the  Neronian  persecution,  had 
sulTered   their   baptism    of   blood.     Yet   even   persecu- 

»  'Pa,/x),  =  100+800  + 40+ 8  =  948.     {Orac.  Sib.  viii.  147.) 
2  Id.  157.  ^  Lactaut.  Div.  Inst.  vii.  15. 


SIGNS    OF    THE    TIMES.  221 

tion  from  without  had  not  secured  the  Church  from 
the  growth  of  deadly  heresies  within.  Every  one  of 
the  Apostles  had  been  driven  to  utter  words  of  sternest 
warning  against  teachers  who,  while  they  called  them- 
selves Christians,  were  guilty  of  worse  than  heathen 
wickedness — who  turned  the  grace  of  God  into  lasci- 
viousness,  and  made  their  liberty  a  cloak  for  evil  lives. 
Thus  alike  the  Jewish  and  the  heathen  world,  each  at 
the  nadir  of  their  degradation  and  impiety,  were  bent 
upon  the  destruction  of  Christ's  little  flock  ;  and  even 
into  that  little  flock  had  intruded  many  who  came  in 
sheep's  clothing,  though  inwardly  they  were  ravening 
wolves. 


Such  were  "  the  signs  of  the  times  "  during  the 
course  of  these  awful  years  in  which  St.  John  found 
himself  on  the  rocky  isle  "  that  is  called  Patmos,"  ^ 
and  uttered  his  prophecies  resj^ecting  the  past,  the 
present,  and  the  immediate  future.  In  those  pro- 
phecies we  see  the  aspect  of  the  age  as  it  presented 
itself  to  the  inspired  mind  of  a  Christian  and  an 
Apostle ;  and  we  can  compare  and  contrast  it  with  the 
aspects  which  it  presented  to  heathens  like  Tacitus 
and  Suetonius,  or  to  Jews  like  Josephus  and  the 
authors  or  interpolators  of  the  Books  of  Enoch  and 
Esdras.  It  is  true  that  our  want  of  familiarity  with 
Apocalyptic  symbols  which  were  familiar  to  the 
Jewish  Christians  of  that  epoch,  seems  at  flrst  to  give 
to  many  of  the  Apostle's  thoughts  an  unwonted  ob- 
scurity.    But,  on  the  one  hand,  the  obscurit}^  does  not 

*  The  expression  militates  against  the  notion  of  Renan,  that  Patmos 
was  at  this  time  populous  and  well-known. 


222  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

affect  those  elements  of  the  book  which  we  at  once  feel 
to  be  of  the  most  eternal  import ;  and  on  the  other, 
we  are  only  left  in  the  dark  about  minor  details  which 
have  found  no  distinct  record  in  history.  Let  any 
student  compare  the  symbols  of  the  Apocalypse  with 
those  of  Joel,  Isaiah,  Ezekiel,  Zechariah,  and  Daniel ; 
let  him  then  see  how  those  symbols  are  applied  by 
the  almost  contemporary  writers  of  such  Jewish  Apoca- 
lypses as  the  Book  of  Enoch,  the  Fourth  Book  of  Esdras, 
and  the  Vision  of  Barucli ;  let  him  meditate  on  the 
conditions  of  the  age  in  the  particulars  which  we 
have  just  been  passing  in  review;  lastly,  let  him 
bear  in  mind  the  luminous  principle  that  the  Apoca- 
lypse is  a  stormy  comment  upon  the  great  discourse 
of  our  Lord  on  Olivet,  as  it  was  being  interpreted 
by  the  signs  of  the  thiies,  and  he  will  read  the 
Vision  of  the  Apostle  with  a  freshness  of  interest  and 
a  clearness  of  apprehension  such  as  he  may  never 
previously  have  enjoyed.  He  will  then  see  in  it,  from 
first  to  last,  the  words  "Maran  atha!  the  Lord  cometh!" 
He  will  recognise  that  the  contemplated  Coming 
was  first  fulfilled  in  the  catastrophe  which  closed 
the  Jewish  dispensation,  and  the  inauguration  of  the 
last  age  of  the  world.  He  will  find  that  the  Apoca- 
lypse is  what  it  professes  to  be — an  inspired  outline 
of  contemporary  history,  and  of  the  events  to  which  the 
sixth  decade  of  the  first  century  gave  immediate  rise. 
He  will  read  in  it  the  tremendous  counter-manifesto 
of  a  Christian  Seer  against  the  bloodstained  triumph 
of  imperial  iieathendom  ;  a  pa^an  and  a  prophecy  over 
the  ashes  of  the  martyrs  ;  "  the  thundering  reverbera- 
tion of  a  mighty  spirit,"  sti'uck  by  the  fierce  plec- 
trum  of    the  Neronian    persecution,  and   answering  in 


DISLIKE    OF    THE    APOCALYPSE.  223 

impassioned  music  which,  like  many  of  David's  Psalms, 
dies  away  into  the  language  of  rapturous  hope. 

And  thus  we  shall  strive  to  overcome  that  spirit  of 
dislike  to  the  Revelation  of  St.  John  which  has  existed 
in  so  many  ages.  We  have  already  seen  that  this 
dislike  existed  among  the  Alogi,^  and  that  it  finds 
expression  in  the  remains  of  the  Presbyter  Gains, 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  and  Eusebius  of  Caesarea.  In 
later  ages  the  disinclination  to  accept  its  authenticity 
found  more  or  less  open  expression  in  the  writings 
of  Erasmus,  Calvin,  Zwingli,  Luther,  GEcolampadius, 
Bucer,  Carlstadt,  as  well  as  in  those  of  Scaliger,  Lowth, 
Schleiermacher,  Goethe,  and  many  others.  This  alie- 
nation from  the  book  arose  in  the  ancient  Church  from 
the  abuse  of  it  by  the  fanaticism  and  narrowness  of  the 
Chiliasts  ;  in  the  modern  Church  from  the  Hellenic 
taste  which  took  offence  at  its  Judaic  imagery,  and 
from  the  discredit  which  it  has  suffered  at  the  hands 
of  rash,  uncharitable,  and  half- educated  interpreters. 
Even  the  most  reverent  enquirers  have  pronounced  it 
to  be  unintelligible.^     Such    views    of  it    can    only    be 

^  The  Alogi  Avere  tliose  wlio  rejected  tlie  doctriue  of  tlie  Logos,  and 
therefore  the  writings  of  St.  John.  The  name  of  this  obscure  sect,  which 
had  its  headquarters  at  Thyatira,  seems  to  have  been  invented  by 
Epiphanius : —  eVei  ody  rhy  A6'yov  ov  Se')(^ovTai  ....  Sa.o~oj  K\-qQriffovTai 
{Haer.  li.  3).  They  attributed  the  Apocalyjise  to  Cerinthus,  dechiring 
that  a  book  about  seals,  trumpets,  &c.,  was  unwortliy  of  an  Apostle,  and 
SJiying  that  he  addressed  a  Chui'ch  in  Thyatira,  when  there  was  no 
Church  in  Thyatira. 

^  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  says  that  the  Alogi  spoke  with  positive 
scorn  {x^fvd(ovres)  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  that  some,  before  his  day,  not 
only  rejected  it,  but  criticised  it  chapter  by  chapter  to  demonstrate  its 
illogical  cliaracter,  and  denied  that  it  could  be  a  Revelation,  seeing  tliat 
it  had  been  covered  with  so  dense  a  veil  of  non-intelligibility.  They,  like 
Gains,  attributed  it  to  Cerinthus.  Juniliiis  tells  us  tliat  the  Eastern 
Church  ]iad  great  doubts  about  it.  "  Fateor  viulta  me  in  ejtis  dlctis 
saeplssime    legendo    scrutatuvi   esse    nee    intellexisse,"    says   Primasius, 


224  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

removed  by  a  reasonable,  a  charitable,  aud — at  least 
■vvithin  broad  limits — a  certain  exegesis. 

For  if  indeed  the  Apocalypse  were  the  kind  of 
treatise  which  it  has  become  in  the  hands  of  contro- 
versialists from  the  Abbot  Joachim  downwards — if  it 
were  a  synopsis  of  anticipated  Church  history,  ringing 
with  the  most  vehement  anathemas  of  sectarian  hatred, 
and  yet  shrouded  in  such  ambiguity  that  every  suc- 
cessive interpreter  has  a  new  scheme  for  its  elucidation 
— if  it  were  a  book  in  which  only  Protestants  could 
take  delight  because  it  is  supposed  to  express  the 
intensest  spirit  of  denunciation  against  the    errors    of 

even  in  the  sixth  century.  St.  Gregory  of  Nyssa  {0pp.  ii.  44,  ed.  Paris) 
quotes  from  the  Apocalypse  as  a  writing  of  St.  John,  ev  airoKpiKpots  .  .  . 
5t'  alyiyfiaTos  xiyovTos,  but  this  expression  does  not  necessarily  mean  that 
he  regarded  it  as  deutero-canonical.  Jerome,  in  the  fourth  century,  said 
that  the  book  had  as  many  mysteries  as  words  (Ep.  liii.  ad  Paiilininn), 
and  Augustine  admitted  that  it  was  full  of  obscurities,  due  in  part  to  its 
repetition  of  the  same  events  with  difPerent  symbols,  and  in  part  to  the 
absence  of  definitive  clues.  "  Et  in  hoc  quidem  libro  obscure  nndta 
dicuntur  .  .  .  et pauca  in  eo  sunt  ex  quorum  manifestatione  indagentur 
caetera  cum  labore,  maxime  quia  sic  eadevi  miiltis  mod'is  repetit "  (Aug. 
De  Civ.  Dei,  xx.  17).  Nicolaus  CoUado  (Methodus,  1584)  dwells  on  tlie 
same  peculiarity  (see  Diisterdieck,  p.  17).  "  Apocalypsim  fateor  menescire 
exponere  juxta  sensum  Uteralem ;  exponat  cui  Deus  concessit,"  wrote  Car- 
dinal Cajetan  (Opj3.  v.  401).  Zwingli  said  lie  took  no  account  of  it :  "  Dann 
es  nit  ein  biblish  Buch  ist"  {Werke,  ii.  169).  Tyndale  wrote  no  preface  to 
the  Apocalyjjse.  Luther  calls  it  "  a  dumb  prophecy."  He  says,  "  Mem 
Geist  kann  sich,  in  das  Buch  ?iicht  stricken,  und  ist  mir  Ursach  genug 
dass  ich  sein  nicht  hoch  achte  dass  Christus  darinnen  weder  gelehrt 
nach  erkannt  wird."  Gravina  says,  "  Mihi  tota  Apocalypsis  valde 
obscura  videtur,  et  talis  cujus  explicatio  citra  periculum  vix  queat 
tentari."  Quite  recent  commentators  have  held  similar  language.  "  Ein 
Buch  von  dem  man  game  Capitel  nach  Ansdriickiing  von  einigen  Tropftn 
saft  als  leere  Sclialen  beiseite-legen  muss  "  (De  Wette).  "No  book  of  the 
New  Testament  has  so  defied  all  attem]»ts  to  settle  its  interpretation  " 
(Bloomfield).  "  I  cannot  pretend  to  explain  the  book ;  I  do  not  understand 
it "  (Adam  Clarke).  "  No  solution  has  ever  been  given  of  this  part  of  the 
prophecy  "  (Alford).  "  Deutero-kanonische  Dignitdt  kommt  ihr  zu,  aber 
nicht  weniger  "  (Diisterdieck). 


MISUSE    OF    THE    APOCALYPSE.  225 

a  Church  which,  whatever  may  be  its  errors,  is  still 
a  sister  Church — then  it  might  be  excusable  if  the 
spirits  of  those  who  seek  peace  and  ensue  it,  and  who 
look  on  brotherly  love  between  Christians  as  the  crown 
of  virtue  and  the  test  of  true  religion,  should  turn 
away  from  the  book  with  a  sense  of  perplexity  and 
weariness.  They  could  never  gain  much  comfort  and 
edification  from  any  pulpit  in  which 

"  A  loud-tongued  pulpiteer, 
Not  preaching  simple  Clirist  to  simple  men, 
Announced  the  coming  doom,  and  fulminated 
Against  the  scarlet  woman  and  her  creed. 
For  sidewise  up  he  flung  his  arms,  and  shrieked 
'Thus,  thus  with  violence,'  as  though  he  held 
The  Apocalyptic  millstone,  and  himself 
Were  that  great  Angel — '  thus  with   violence 
Shall  Babylon  be  thrown  into   the  sea. 
Then  comes  the  end.'  " ' 

There  are  few  of  us  who  would  find  much  music 
in  such  "  loud-tongued  anti-Babylonianisms  "  as  these. 
The  blind  fumes  of  party  hatred  can  only  distract  and 
lead  astray.  The  spirit  of  the  Inquisition,  even  when 
it  is  found  in  Protestants,  is  essentially  anti-Christian. 
It  is  a  scorpion-locust  out  of  the  abyss.  But  when 
we  put  ourselves  in  the  position  of  the  Seer,  and  grasp 
the  clues  to  his  meaning  which  he  has  himself  fur- 
nished— when  we  accept  his  own  assurance  that  he  is 
mainly  dealing  with  events  which  were  on  the  imme- 
diate horizon — when,  lastly,  we  discount  the  Oriental 
hyperboles  which,  in  fact,  cease  to  be  hyperbolical  if 
they  be  understood  in  their  normal  usage,  then  for  the 

'  Tennyson  (Sea  Dreams).  "  Tohim  hunc  lihrunn  .  .  .  spectare prae- 
cipue  ad  describendam  tyrannidem  spirihialem  Romani  papains  et  totius 
cleri  ejus  "  (Nic.  Collado,  ap.  Diisterdieck,  p.  48). 

P 


226  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

first  time  we  begin  to  understand  the  Apocalypse  in 
all  its  passion  and  grandeur,  as  it  was  understood  by 
those  for  whom  it  was  written.  We  no  longer  expect 
to  find  in  it  the  Saracen  conquests,  or  the  Waldenses, 
or  the  French  Eevolution,  or  "  the  rise  of  Tracta- 
rianism."  We  are  soothed  by  its  heavenly  consolations 
and  inspired  by  its  inextinguishable  hopes.  When  read 
in  the  light  of  events  then  contemporary,  it  rolls  with 
all  its  thunder  and  burns  with  all  its  fires.  Over  the 
guilt  of  Jerusalem,  over  the  guilt  of  Eome,  it  hurls 
the  prophecy  of  inevitable  doom.  Around  the  diadem 
of  Nero  and  the  hydra-heads  of  Paganism  in  its  hour 
of  tyranny  and  triumph  it  flashes  the  sure  wrath  of 
heaven.^  But,  like  all  prophecy,  it  has  "  springing  and 
germinal  developments."  It  is  the  defiance  uttered 
hj  true  Christianity  for  all  time  against  the  tortures, 
the  legions,  the  amphitheatres,  the  fagots,  the  prisons, 
the  thumbscrews,  the  falsehoods,  the  inquisitions  of 
that  demoniac  spirit  of  persecuting  intolerance,  which, 
whether  it  uses  the  asp-poison  of  slander  or  the  sword 
of  murder,  is  never  so  irreligious  as  when  it  vaunts  its 
zeal  for  God.     Though  he  wrote  in  the  hour  of  seeming 

1  The  use  of  tlie  word  "  diadem  "  of  the  Roman  Emperor  in  this  book 
is  made  much  of  by  the  commentators,  who  try  to  overthrow  the  sure 
results  of  recent  exegesis.  They  urge  that  Caligula  alone  of  the  Caesars 
ever  attempted  to  Avear  a  diadem,  as  distinguished  from  a  crown  or 
AATeath ;  that  Julius  Cajsar  refused  a  diadem ;  that  Sulpicius  Severus  is 
mistaken  when  he  describes  Vespasian  as  wearing  one ;  and  that  the  first 
Emperor  wlio  boldly  assumed  this  badge  of  Oriental  autocracy — a  purple 
silken  fillet,  embroidered  with  pearls — was  Diocletian.  Meanwhile  tliis 
imposing  array  of  arguments  crumbles  at  a  toucli.  When  Antony  offered 
the  diadem  to  Julius,  he  betrayed  the  secret  as  to  tlie  real  diaracter  of 
Imperial  power.  Orientals  in  tlie  provinces  botli  thought  and  spoke  of  the 
Emi>erors  as  "  Kings,"  thougli  such  a  name  would  liave  liorrified  the 
Romans ;  but  Oriental  kings  wore  diadems,  and  therefore  the  Oriental 
symbol  of  the  Roman  Emperor  was  the  diadem. 


SCHOOLS    OF    INTERPRETATION.  227 

ruin,  sucli  is  the  passionate  intensity  with  which  the 
Seer  pours  forth  the  language  of  victory,  that  it  seems 
as  though  the  hand  which  he  has  dipped  in  the  blood 
of  the  martyrs  flames  like  a  torch  as  he  upKfts  it  in 
appeal  to  the  avenging  heavens.  And  since  the  truths 
which  he  utters  become  needful  at  the  recurrence  of 
every  similar  crisis — and  most  of  all  when  the  exe- 
crable weapons  of  tyranny  are  grasped  by  the  reckless 
hands  of  sectarian  bitterness — the  Apocalypse  has  ever 
been  dearest  to  God's  true  saints  at  the  hour  of  their 
deepest  trials.  It  ceases  then  to  be  a  great  silent 
sphinx,  reading  its  eternal  riddle  at  the  gate  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  devouring  those  who  fail  to  answer  it ;  it 
becomes  a  series  of  glorious  pictures,  wherein  "  are  set 
forth  the  rise,  the  visible  existence,  and  the  general 
future  of  Christ's  kingdom,  in  figures  and  similitudes 
of  His  First  Coming,  to  terrify  and  to  console."^ 

There  have  been  three  great  schools  of  Apocalyptic 
interpretation: — 1.  The  Prseterists,  who  regard  the 
book  as  having  been  mainly  fulfilled.  2.  The  Futurists, 
who  refer  it  to  events  which  are  still  wholly  future. 
3.  The  Continuous-Historical  Interpreters,  who  see 
in  it  an  outline  of  Christian  history  from  the  days  of 
St.  John  down  to  the  End  of  all  things.  The  second 
of  these  schools  —  the  Futurists  —  has  always  been 
numerically  small,  and  at  present  may  be  said  to  be 
non-existent.  The  school  of  Historical  Interpreters 
was  founded  by  the  Abbot  Joachim  early  in  the  13th 
century,  and  was  specially  flourishing  in  the  first  fifty 
years  of  the  present  century.^     The  views  of  the  Prse- 

^  Herder. 

2  There  are  two  sclioqls  of  the  interpreters  who  make  the  Ap()Paly|:)se 
a  prophecy  of  aU  Christian  history.  The  school  of  Bengel,  Vitriuga, 
Elliott,  &c.,  make  it  mainly  a  history  of  the  Church.     Another  school 

p  2 


228  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

terists  have  been  adopted,  witli  various  shades  of  modi- 
fication, by  Grotius,  Hammond,  Le  Clerc,  Bossuet, 
Eichhom,  Hug,  AVetstein,  Ewald,  Herder,  Zullig, 
Bleek,  De  Wette,  Liicke,  Moses  Stuart,  Davidson, 
Volkmar,  Krenkel,  Diisterdieck,  Eenan,  and  almost  the 
whole  school  of  modern  German  critics  and  interpreters. 
It  has  been  usual  to  say  that  the  Spanish  Jesuit  Alcasar, 
in  his  Vcstif/atio  arccun  senms  in  Jjjocali/psi  (1614),  was 
the  founder  of  the  Prseterist  School,  and  it  certainly 
seems  as  if  to  him  must  be  assigned  the  credit  of  having 
first  clearly  enunciated  the  natural  view  that  the  Apoca- 
lypse, like  all  other  known  Apocalypses  of  the  time, 
describes  events  nearly  contemporaneous,  and  is  meant 
to  shadow  forth  the  triumph  of  the  Church  in  the 
stru2"2:le  first  with  Judaism  and  then  with  Heathen- 
dom.  But  to  me  it  seems  that  the  founder  of  the 
Pra^terist  School  is  none  other  than  St.  John  himself. 
For  he  records  the  Christ  as  saying  to  him  when  he 
was  in  the  Spirit,  "Write  the  things  which  thou  sawest, 
and  THE  THINGS  WHICH  ARE,  and  the  things  which  are 
about  to  happen  (a  fikWeL  yiveadai)  after  these  things." 
No  language  surely  could  more  clearly  define  the  bear- 
ing of  the  Apocalypse.  It  is  meant  to  describe  the 
contemporary  state  of  things  in  the  Church  and  the 
world,  and  the  events  which  were  to  follow  in  immediate 
sequence.  If  the  Historical  School  can  strain  the  latter 
words  into  an  indication  that  we  are  (contrary  to  all 
analogy)  to  have  a  symbolic  and  unintelligible  sketch  of 
many  centuries,  the  Prseterist  School  may  at  any  rate 

regards  it  more  generally,  and  less  specifically,  as  an  outline  of  Epochs 
of  the  History  of  the  world  and  the  great  forces  which  shape  it  into  a 
Kingdom  of  God.  To  this  latter  school  belong  Hengsteuberg,  Ebrard, 
Auberlen,  &c. 


PR^TERIST    INTERPRETATION.  229 

apply  these  words,  a  elalv,  "the  things  which  are,"  to 
vindicate  the  application  of  a  large  part  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse to  events  nearly  contemporary,  while  they  also  give 
the  natural  meaning  to  the  subsequent  clause  by  under- 
standing it  of  events  which  were  then  on  the  horizon. 
The  Seer  emphatically  says  that  the  future  events  which 
he  has  to  foreshadow  will  occur  speedUij  (eV  rax^L^  ^  and 
the  recurrent  burden  of  his  whole  book  is  the  nearness 
of  the  Advent  (o  Kaipo'i  ejyv'i).  Language  is  simply  mean- 
ingless if  it  is  to  be  so  manipulated  by  every  successive 
commentator  as  to  make  the  words  "  speedily "  and 
"  near  "  imply  any  number  of  centuries  of  delay.  The 
Prseterist  method  of  interpretation  does  not,  however, 
interfere  with  that  view  of  prophecy  which  was  so  well 
defined  by  Dr.  Arnold.  This  is  the  view  of  those  who 
have  been  called  the  "  spiritual  "  interpreters.  It  admits 
of  the  analogical  application  of  prophecy  to  conditions 
which,  in  the  cycles  of  history,  bear  a  close  resemblance 
to  each  other.  It  applies  to  all  times  the  principles 
originally  laid  down  with  reference  to  events  which 
were  being  then  enacted,  and  starts  with  the  axiom  of 
Bacon,  that  divine  prophecies  have  steps  and  grades 
of  fulfilment  through  divers  ages.^  All  that  is  really 
valuable  in  the  works  of  the  Historical  Interpreters 
may  thus  be  retained.     No  importance  can  be  attached 

1  Comp.  Toxv  (Rev.  ii.  5,  16  ;  iii.  11 ;  xi.  14  ;  xxii.  20).  It  is  curious  to 
see  with  what  extraordinary  ease  commeutators  explain  the  perfectly  simple 
and  ambiguous  expression  "speedily"  (eV  raxe');  to  mean  any  length  of 
time  which  they  may  choose  to  demand.  The  word  "  immediately,"  in 
Matt.  xxiv.  29,  has  been  subject  to  similar  handling,  in  which  indeed  all 
Scripture  exegesis  abounds.  The  failure  to  see  that  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem 
and  the  end  of  the  Mosaic  Dispensation  was  a  "  Second  Advent  " — and 
the  Second  Advent  contemplated  in  many  of  the  New  Testament  prophc- 
cies — has  led  to  a  multitude  of  errors. 

2  De  Augment.  Scient.  ii.  11. 


230  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

to  their  limitation  of  particular  symbols,  but  the  better 
part  of  their  labours  may  be  accepted  as  an  illustration 
of  the  manner  in  which  the  Apocalyptic  symbols  convey 
moral  lessons  which  are  applicable  to  the  conditions  of 
later  times. 

But,  apart  from  St.  John's  own  words,  it  cannot  be 
conceded  that  the  central  conception  of  the  Prseterist 
exegesis  is  a  mere  novelty  of  the  17th  century.  On 
the  contrary,  we  can  trace  from  very  early  days  the 
application  of  various  visions  to  the  early  emperors  of 
Pagan  Rome.  Thus  Justin  Martyr  believed  that  tlie 
Antichrist  would  be  a  person  who  was  close  at  hand,  and 
who  would  reign  three  and  a  half  years. ^  Irenseus  also 
thought  that  Antichrist,  as  foreshadowed  by  the  Wild 
Beast,  would  be  a  man ;  and  that  "the  number  of  the 
Beast  "  represented  Lafelnos,  "  a  Latin. "^  Hippolytus 
compares  the  action  of  the  False  Prophet  giving  life 
to  the  Beast's  image,  to  Augustus  inspiring  fresh  force 
into  the  Roman  Empire.^  Later  on,  I  shall  furnish 
abundant  evidence  that  a  tradition  of  the  ancient  Church 
identified  Nero  with  the  Antichrist,  and  expected  his 
literal  return,  just  as  the  Jews  ex^Dected  the  literal  return 
of  the  Prophet  Elijah.  St.  Victorinus  (about  a.d.  303) 
counts  the  five  dead  emperors  from  Galba,  and  supposes 
that,  after  Nerva,  the  Beast  (whom  he  identifies  with 
Nero)  will  be  recalled  to  life.*  St.  Augustine  mentions 
a  similar  opinion.^  The  Pseudo-Prochorus,  writing  on 
Rev.  xvii.  10,  says  that  the  "one  head  which  is"  is 
meant  for  Domitian.     Bishop  Andreas,  in  the  fifth  cen- 

1  Dial.  c.  Tryph.  p.  250. 

2  Iren.  Haer.  v.  25. 

^  De  Antichristo,  p.  6. 

*  "  Bestia  de  septem  est  quoniani  ante  ipsos  roges  Nero  regiiavit." 

'•>  De  Civ.  Dei,  xx.  19. 


PR^TERISTS.  231 

tury,  applies  Eev.  vi.  12  to  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and 
considers  that  Antichrist  will  be  "  as  a  king  of  the 
Romans."  Bishop  Arethas,  on  Eev.  vii.,  implies  that 
the  Apocalypse  was  written  before  the  Jewish  War. 
The  fragments  of  ancient  comment  which  we  possess 
cannot  be  said  to  have  much  intrinsic  value ;  but  such 
as  they  are  they  suffice  to  prove  that  the  tendency  of 
modern  exegesis  approaches  quite  as  nearly  to  the 
earliest  traditions  as  that  of  the  Historic  School.  It  is 
a  specially  important  fact  that  St.  Augustine,  as  well  as 
many  others,  recognised  the  partially  retrogressive  and 
iterative  character  of  the  later  visions,  and  thereby  sanc- 
tioned one  of  the  most  important  principles  of  modern 
interpretation.^  The  internal  evidence  that  the  book 
was  written  before  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  has  satisfied  not 
only  many  Christian  commentators,  who  are  invidiously 
stigmatised  as  "  rationalistic,"  but  even  such  writers 
as  Wetstein,  Liicke,  Neander,  Stier,  Auberlen,  Ewald, 
Bleek,  Gebhardt,  Immer,  Davidson,  Diisterdieck,  Moses 
Stuart,  F.  D.  Maurice,  the  author  of  "  The  Parousia," 
Dean  Plumptre,  the  authors  of  the  Protesta)iteu-BibeI , 
and  multitudes  of  others  no  less  entitled  to  the  respect 
of  all  Christians. 

If,  however,  the  reader  still  looks  with  prejudice 
and  suspicion  on  the  onJi/  school  of  Apocalyptic  exegesis 
which  unites  the  suffrai^es  of  the  most  learned  recent 
commentators  in  Germany,  France,  and  England,  I 
hardly  know  where  he  is  to  turn.  The  reason  why 
the  early  date  and  mainly  contemporary  explanation 
of  the  book  is  daily  winning  fresh  adherents  among 
unbiassed  thinkers  of  every  Church  and  school,  is 
partly  because   it   rests    on    so    simple    and    secure    a 

»  Id.  ih.  17. 


232  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

basis,  and  partly  because  no  other  can  compete  with 
it.  It  is  indeed  the  only  system  which  is  built  on 
the  plain  and  repeated  statements  and  indications  of 
the  Seer  himself,  and  the  corresponding  events  are  so 
closely  accordant  with  the  sjmbols  as  to  make  it 
certain  that  this  scheme  of  interpretation  is  the  only 
one  that  can  survive.  A  few  specimens  may  suffice  to 
show  how  completely  other  systems  float  in  the 
air. 

Let  us  suppose  that  the  student  has  found  out  that 
in  viii.  13  the  true  reading  is  "  a  single  eagle,"  not  an 
angel ;  but,  whether  eagle  or  angel,  he  wants  to  know 
what  the  S3'mbol  means.  He  turns  to  the  commen- 
tators, and  finds  that  it  is  explained  to  be  the  Holy 
Spirit  (Victorinus) ;  or  Pope  Gregory  the  Great  (Elliott); 
or  St.  John  himself  (De  Lyra)  ;  or  St.  Paul  (Zcger)  ;  or 
Christ  himself  (Wordsworth).  The  Pra?terists  mostly 
take  it  to  be  simply  an  eagle,  as  the  Scriptural  type  of 
carnage — the  figure  being  suggested  not  by  the  re- 
semblance of  the  word  "  woe  !  "  ("  ouai  ")  to  the  eagle's 
screams,  but  by  the  use  of  the  same  symbol  for  the 
same  purpose  by  our  Lord  in  His  discourse  about  the 
things  to  come.^ 

But  this  is  nothing  !  The  student  wishes  to  learn 
what  is  meant  by  the  star  fallen  from  heaven,  in  ix.  L 
The  Historical  school  will  leave  him  to  choose  between 
an  evil  spirit  (Alford)  ;  a  Christian  heretic  (Words- 
worth) ;  the  Emperor  Valens  (De  Lyra) ;  Mohammed 
(Elliott) ;  and,  among  others.  Napoleon  (Hengsten- 
berg)  ! 

The  confusion  deepens  as  we  advance.     The  locusts 

'  Matt.  xxiv.  28. 


HISTORICAL    INTERPRETERS.  233 

are  "heretics  "  (Bede);  or  Gotlis  (Vitringa);  or  Vandals 
(Aureolus) ;  or  Saracens  (Mede) ;  or  the  mendicant 
orders  (Brightman) ;  or  the  Jesuits  (Scherzer) ;  or 
Protestants  (Bellarmine). 

The  same  endless  and  aimless  diversity  reigns 
throughout  the  entire  works  of  the  Historical  inter- 
preters ;  none  of  them  seems  to  satisfy  any  one  but 
himself.  The  elaborate  anti-papal  interpretation  of 
Elliott — of  which  (to  show  that  I  am  far  from  pre- 
judiced) I  may  mention,  in  passing,  that  I  made  a 
careful  study  and  a  full  abstract  when  I  was  seventeen 
years  old — is  all  but  forgotten.  Mr.  Faber  admits 
that  there  is  not  the  least  agreement  as  to  the  first 
four  trumpets  among  writers  of  his  school,  and  he 
rightly  says  that  "  so  curious  a  circumstance  may 
well  be  deemed  the  opprobrium  of  Apocalyptic  inter- 
pretation, and  may  naturally  lead  us  to  suspect  that 
the  true  key  to  the  distinct  application  of  the  first  four 
trumpets  has  never  yet  been  found." 

Not  that  this  school  leave  us  any  better  ofi*  when 
we  come  to  the  seven  thunders.  They  are  seven  un- 
known oracles  (Mede) ;  or  events  (Ebrard) ;  or  the  seven 
crusades  (Vitringa) ;  or  the  seven  Protestant  king- 
doms (Dunbar) ;  or  the  Papal  Bull  against  Luther 
(Elliott). 

The  two  wings  of  the  great  eagle  in  xii.  14  are  the 
two  Testaments  (Wordsworth)  ;  or  the  eastern  and 
western  divisions  of  the  empire  (Mede,  Auberlen) ;  or 
the  Emperor  Theodosius  (Elliott). 

The  number  of  the  Beast — which  may  be  now  re- 
garded as  certainly  intended  to  stand  for  Nero — has 
been  made  to  serve  for  Genseric,  Benedict,  Trajan, 
Paul  v.,   Calvin,  Luther,   Mohammed,  Napoleon — not 


234  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

to  mention  a  host  of  other  interpretations  which  no  one 
has  ever  accepted  except  their  authors.^ 

It  is  needless  to  multiply  further  instances.  They 
might  be  multiplied  almost  indefinitely,  but  their 
muUijiUcHy  is  not  so  decisive  of  the  futility  of  the 
principles  on  which  they  are  selected,  as  is  the  diversity 
of  results  which  are  wider  than  the  poles  asunder. 
"What  are  we  to  say  of  methods  which  leave  us  to 
choose  between  the  applicability  of  a  symbol  to  the 
Holy  Spirit  or  to  Pope  Gregory,  to  the  Two  Testa- 
ments or  to  the  Emperor  Theodosius  ?  Anyone,  on  the 
other  hand,  who  accepts  the  Praeterist  system  finds  a 
wide  and  increasing  consensus  among  competent  en- 
quirers of  all  nations,  and  can  see  an  explanation  of 
the  book  which  is  simple,  natural,  and  noble— one 
which  closely  follows  its  own  indications,  and  accords 
with  those  to  be  found  throughout  the  New  Testament. 
He  sees  that  events,  mainly  contemporary,  provide  an 
interpretation  clear  in  its  outlines,  though  necessarily 
uncertain  in  minor  details.  If  he  takes  the  view  of  the 
Spiritualists,  he  may  at  his  pleasure  make  the  symbols 
mean  anything  in  general  and  nothing  in  particular. 
If  he  is  of  the  Historical  School  he  must  let  the 
currents  of  Gieseler  or  Gibbon  sweep  him  hither  and 
thither  at  the  will  of  the  particular  commentator  in 
whom  he  for  the  time  may  chance  to  confide.  But  if 
he  follows  the  guidance  of  a  more  reasonable  exegesis, 
he  may  advance  with  a  sure  step  along  a  path  which 
becomes  clearer  with  every  fresh  discovery. 

But  I  cannot  leave  this  subject  of  Apocalyptic 
interpretation    without    repeating    my   conviction,  that 

^  The  majority  of  guesses  wliich  liave  the  least  seriousness  iu  them 
poiut  to  Rome,  the  Roman  Empire,  or  the  Romau  Emperor. 


APOCALYPTIC    LITERATURE.  235 

the  essential  sacredness  and  preciousness  of  the  book 
lies  deeper  than  the  primary  or  secondary  interpreta- 
tions of  its  separate  visions.  Whatever  system  of 
exegesis  we  adopt — whether  we  suppose  that  St.  John 
was  indicating  to  the  Churches  of  Asia  the  influence 
of  Mohammed,  Hildebrand,  and  Luther  centuries  later 
• — whether  he  w^as  foreshadowing  events  of  which  they 
could  not  have  the  remotest  comprehension,  or  events 
with  which  they  were  immediately  and  terribly  concerned 
— he  is,  at  any  rate,  dealing  on  the  one  hand  with  awful 
warnings,  and  on  the  other  with  exceeding  great  and 
precious  promises.  His  teaching  is  needful  for  our 
education  in  the  ways  of  God.  It  will  be  well  for  every 
Christian  to  take  it  deeply  to  heart.  Amid  endless 
diversities,  here  at  any  rate  is  a  point  respecting  which 
all  true  Christians  may  be  cordially  agreed. 

It  is  admitted  by  every  unbiassed  critic  that 
Apocalyptic  literature  is  inferior  in  form  to  the  Pro- 
phetic. The  Jews  themselves  have  marked  their  sense 
of  this  by  excluding  the  Book  of  Daniel  from  the 
prophetic  canons,  and  placing  it  among  the  Hagio- 
grai^ha.  Apocalypses  belong,  as  a  rule,  to  later  ages 
and  less  vivid  inspiration.  Why  then,  it  may  be 
asked,  did  St.  John  choose  this  form  of  utterance  ? 
The  answer  is  simple.  It  was,  first,  because  it  was  in 
this  form  that  his  inspiration  came  to  him ;  it  was  in 
this  form  that  his  thoughts  naturally  clothed  them- 
selves. It  w^as,  next,  because  the  Apocalypse  was  the 
favourite  form  of  the  prophetico-poetic  literature  of 
this  epoch,  with  which  many  instances  had  made  his 
readers  familiar.  But  lastly,  and  perhaps  chiefly,  it 
was  from  the  dangers  of  the  time.  An  Apocalypse,  by 
the  very  meaning  of  the  term,  implies  a  book  which 


236  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

is  more  or  less  cryptographic  in  its  contents.  Hence 
in  every  Apocalypse — in  the  Books  of  Esdras,  Enoch, 
and  Baruch,  no  less  than  in  St.  John — there  are  for  us 
some  necessary  difficulties  in  the  details  of  interpretation 
which  perhaps  did  not  exist  for  contemporary  readers. 
But  if  anything  were  obscure  to  them,  this  was  more 
than  compensated  by  the  resultant  safety.  No  danger 
incurred  by  the  early  Christians  was  greater  than  that 
caused  by  the  universal  prevalence  of  political  spies.  If 
one  of  these  wretches  got  possession  of  any  Christian 
wTiting  which  could  be  construed  into  an  attack  or  a 
reflexion  upon  their  terrible  persecutors,  hundreds  might 
be  involved  in  indiscriminate  punishment  on  a  charge 
of  high  treason  ijaesa  majestaa),  which  w^as  then  the 
most  formidable  engine  of  despotic  power.  St.  Paul, 
writing  to  the  Thessalonians  even  so  early  as  ad.  52, 
had  found  it  necessary  to  speak  of  the  Roman  Empire 
and  of  the  Emperors  Claudius  or  Nero  in  terms  of 
studied  enigma.^  St.  Peter,  making  a  casual  allusion 
to  Eome,  had  been  obliged  to  veil  it  under  the  mystic 
name  of  Babylon.^  Even  Josephus  has  to  break  off  his 
explanation  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  with  mj^sterious  sud- 
denness, rather  than  indicate  that  the  fate  of  the  Roman 
Empire  was  there  foreshadowed.  Concealed  methods  of 
allusion  are,  for  similar  reasons,  again  and  again  adopted 
in  the  Talmud.  St.  John  saw  in  Nero  a  realisation 
of  Antichrist ;  but  it  would  have  been  fatal  to  whole  com- 
munities, perhaps  to  the  entire  Church,  if  he  had  openly 
committed  to  waiting  either  the  indication  of  Nero's 
character  or  the  prophecy  of  his  doom.  He  could 
only  do  this  in  the  guise  of  Scriptural  and  prophetic 
symbols,  which  would  look  like  meaningless  rhapsodies 

'  2  Thess.  ii.  3—12.  »  j  Pet._  v.  13. 


APOOALrPTIC    LITERATURE.  237 

to  any  Gentile  reader,  but  of  which,  as  he  was  well 
aware,  the  secret  significance  was  in  the  hands  of  those 
for  whom  alone  his  revelation  was  intended.  It  may 
be  laid  down  as  a  rule,  to  which  there  is  no  exception, 
that  the  commentator  who  ajDproaches  the  Apocalypse 
without  the  fullest  recognition  of  the  fact  that  in  its 
tone  and  in  its  symbols  it  bears  a  very  close  analogy 
to  a  multitude  of  other  Apocalyptic  books,  both  Jewish 
and  Christian,  is  sure  to  go  utterly  astraj^  But  if  he 
knows  the  symbols  and  their  significance,  not  only  from 
the  Old  Testament  but  also  from  seeing  how  the 
imagery  of  the  Old  Testament  was  applied  in  the  first 
century  to  contemporary  events,  he  will  be  prepared  to 
see  that  to  the  original  readers  of  the  Apocalj-pse,  at 
any  rate,  the  book  had  and  could  have  but  one  meaning, 
and  that  the  intended  meaning  is  still  partially  discover- 
able by  those  who  do  not  read  its  visions  through  the 
ecclesiastical  veil  of  unnatural  and  fantastic  hypotheses. 


CHAPTEE   XXVIII. 

THE    APOCALYPSE. 

"  Apocalyjisis  Joliauuis  tot  liabot  sacrameuta  quot  verba.     Parum  dixi 
pro  merito  vohimiiiis.     Laus  omuis  inferior  est."— Jer.  ad  Vaulin. 

In  the  superscription  of  tlie  Apocalypse  found  in  some 
of  the  cursive  manuscripts,  St.  John  is  called  by  the  title 
of  "the  Theologian,"  or,  as  it  is  rendered  in  our  version, 
"  the  Divine."  It  was  a  title  borne  by  the  highest  order 
of  priests  in  the  Temple  of  the  Ephesian  Artemis,  as 
appears  from  inscriptions  discovered  by  Mr.  Wood  at 
Ephesus.  It  is,  however,  unlikely  that  St.  John  bore  the 
title  in  his  own  day,  or  that  it  was  intended  to  contrast 
him  with  the  local  and  pagan  hierarchy.  It  was  more 
probably  due  to  the  grandeur  of  his  witness  to  Christ 
as  the  Divine  Logos.  It  is  remarkable  that  only  one 
great  Christian  writer  has  shared  it  with  him — the 
large-hearted  St.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus.  The  true 
Theolog}^  is  the  glorious  mother  of  all  the  sciences,  and 
differs  infinitely  from  the  narrow  and  technical  pedantry 
which  has  in  modern  times  too  often  usurped  the 
exclusive  name.  It  would  have  been  well  for  the  world 
if  it  could  have  rescued  the  term  from  the  degradation 
to  which  it  has  been  subjected  by  Pharisaism  and  self- 
assertion.  Theology  would  have  received  the  honour  of 
all  mankind  if  it  had  not  so  often  mistaken  verbal 
minutiae  for  divine  essentials,  if  its  self-styled  votaries 


THE    SEVEN    CHURCHES.  239 

Lad  cauglit  something  of  the  love  and  something  of 
the  loftiness  of  the  Beloved  Disciple  of  Galilee  and  the 
eloquent  Patriarch  of  Constantinople. 

SECTION    I. 

THE    LETTERS    TO    THE    SEVEN    CHURCHES. 

To  write  a  full  commentary  upon  the  Apocatypse,  or  to 
enter  into  the  numerous  questions  to  which  it  gives  rise, 
would  be  impossible  in  the  space  at  my  disposal.  All  that 
I  can  hope  to  do  is  to  give  a  rapid  outline  of  its  con- 
tents, and,  so  far  as  ascertainable,  of  its  probable  mean- 
ing in  those  parts  of  its  symbolism  which  are  capable  of 
explanation,  or  which  do  not  at  once  explain  themselves. 

After  the  Prologue,-^  the  main  sections  of  the  book 
are  arranged  in  accordance  with  the  number  Seven, 
which  is  the  most  prominent  among  the  symbolic 
numbers  with  which  the  book  is  filled.     Thus  we  have : — 

Prologue,  i.  1 — 8. 

1.  Letters  to  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia,  i.  9 — iii.  22. 

2.  The  Seven  Seals,  iv. — vii. 

3.  The  Seven  Trumpets,  viii. — xi. 

4.  The  Seven  Mystic  Figures,  xii. — xiv.^ 

5.  The  Seven  Vials,  xv. — xvi. 

6.  The  Doom  of  the  Foes  of  Christ,  xvii — xx. 

7.  The  Blessed  Consummation,  xxi. — xxii.  7. 

^  The  Yision  takes  place  ou  "  the  Lord's  Day,"  wliieh  probably  means 
neither  "  Easter  Day,"  nor  the  "  Day  of  Judgment,"  but  "  Sunday."  It  is 
the  earliest  use  of  the  expression,  but  furnishes  no  pro.of  at  all  of  the  later 
date  assigned  to  the  Apocalypse. 

^  I  borrow  this  ingenious  suggestion  from  the  author  of  the  "  Parousia," 
a  book  full  of  suggestiveness,  although  I  disagree  with  the  author  in  its 
limitation  of  the  Apocaly[)tic  horizon  mainly  to  Jerusalem.  The  Seven 
Mystic  Figures  are  : — (1)  Tlie  Sim-clothed  Woman  ;  (2)  The  Red  Dragon; 
(3)  The  Man-child ;  (4)  The  First  Wild  Beast  from  the  Sea  ;  (5)  The 
Second  Wild  Beast  from  the  Land;  (6)  The  Lamb  on  Mount  Sion; 
(7)  The  Son  of  Man  on  the  Cloud. 


240  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

The  Epilogue,  xxii.  8—21.^ 

The  Seven  Churches  addressed  in  the  person  of 
their  Angels^  are  : — 

Epiiksus,  the  Church  faithful  as  yd,  but  waxing  cold. 

Smyrna,  the  Church  faithful  amid  Jewish  perse- 
cutions. 

Percamum,  the  Church  faithful  amid  heathen 
persecutions,  but  liable  to  swerve  into  Antinomianisra. 

Thy  ATI  RA,  the  Church  faithful  as  3^et,  but  acqui- 
escent under  Antinomian  seductions. 

Sardis,  the  Church  slumbering,  but  not  past  awaken- 
ment. 

Philadelphia,  the  Church  faithful  and  militant. 

1  Ewakl  divides  the  book  iuto  tlirec  main  sections  of  seven  members 
each  : — The  Seven  Seals  (iv. — vii.) ;  the  Seven  Trumpets  (viii. — xi.  14) ; 
the  Seven  Vials,  with  the  group  of  associated  Yisions  (xi.  15 — xxii.  3), 
which  are  divided  into  three  members  (xi.  15 — xiv.  20  ;  xv. — xviii. ;  xix. — 
xxii.  5).  He  thinks  that  the  book  has  an  Introduction  in  four  parts ; 
Preface  and  Dedication  in  seven  parts  (ii.,  iii.) ;  and  a  Conclusion  in  three 
parts.  Volkniar's  division  is  into  two  main  parts : — (I.)  Tlie  Announce- 
ment of  tlie  Judgment  (i. — ix) ;  (II.)  Tlie  Achievement  of  the  Judgment 
(x. — xiv.).  The  subordinate  parts  are: — Prologue  (i.  1 — 7);  (1)  First 
Vision  (i.  8— iii.);  (2)  Second  Vision,  the  Seals  (iv.— vii.);  (3)  Third 
Vision,  the  loud  Declaration  of  God's  Judgment  (viii.,  ix);  (4)  Fourth 
Vision,  the  Introductory  Judgment  (x. — xiv.) ;  (5)  Fifth  Vision,  Avenging 
Justice  (xv.,  xvi.);  (6)  Sixth  Vision,  the  overthrow  of  tlie  World-Power. 
or  Rome  (xvii.,  xviii.) ;  (7)  Seventh  Vision,  the  Completion  of  t];e  Judg- 
ment (xix. — xxi);  Epilogue. — "Whatever  division  of  the  book  be  adopted, 
it  will  be  seen  at  once  that  it  is  constructed  in  a  very  artificial  numner, 
and  dominated  by  the  numbers  seven,  three,  and  foiir.  Seven  is  the 
mystic  number  of  peace,  expiation,  and  the  covenant  between  God  and 
man.  Three  is  the  signature  of  the  Deity.  Four  is  the  number  of  the 
world  and  created  things.  Ten  =  l  +  2-f3  +  4,  indicates  completeness. 
On  the  symbolism  of  numbers,  see  Bahr,  SymboWc.  i.  187,  &c.  Herzog. 
Real.  Encycl.  s.  v.  Zalden;  Lange,  Revelations,  Introd.  §  6,  &c. 

'^  The  Angels  cannot  be  the  Bishops,  for  even  if  the  Domitianic  date  of 
the  Apocalypse  be  accepted,  episcojiacy  had  not  even  tlicn  attained  to  such 
proportions,  and  if  the  Ancients  had  supposed  the  Bishops  to  be  meant, 
they  would  have  adopted  this  title  in  sjK'aking  of  them.  Probably  the 
title  implies  the  Genius  of  the  Church,  ideally  represented  as  a  Responsible 


THE    SEVEN    CHURCHES.  241 

Laodicea,  the  Church  unfaithful,  proud,  lukewarm, 
and  luxurious.^ 

The  letters  to  these  Seven  Churches  are  normally 
sevenfold,  consisting  of : — 1.  The  address  ;  2.  The  title 
of  the  Divine  Speaker;  3.  The  encomium;  4.  The 
reproof;  5.  The  warning;  6.  The  promise  to  him  that 
overcometh;  7.  The  solemn  appeal  to  attention.  These 
elements  are,  however,  freely  modified.  Two  Churches 
— Smyrna  and  Philadelphia — receive  unmitigated  praise. 
Two — Sardis  and  Laodicea — are  addressed  in  terms  ot 
unmitigated  reproof.  To  the  three  others — Ephesus, 
Pergamum,  and  Thyatira — is  awarded  a  mixture  of 
praise  and  blame. 

The  Angel  of  the  Church  of  Ephesus  is  praised  for 
"  having  tried  them  which  called  themselves  Apostles, 
and  they  are  not,^  and  having  found  them  false,"  and 
also  for  hating  the  works  of  the  Nicolaitaus.  The 
Angel  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna  is  praised  for  faith- 
fulness amid  "  the  reviling  of  them  which  say  they  are 
Jews  and  are  not,  but  are  a  synagogue  of  Satan."  The 
Angel  of  the  Church  of  Pergamum  is  blamed  because 
he   has   there    "some   who   hold   the   teaching  of  the 

Head,  or  Guardian  of  it ;  just  as  Daniel  idealises  the  Angels  of  the  nations 
(Dan.  X.  20,21;  xii.  1). 

1  The  number  seven  is  ideal.  It  is  idle  to  suppose  that  there  were  no 
churches  at  Tralles,  Hierapolis,  Laodicea,  &c.  The  book  is  pervaded  by 
the  number  seven  (i.  4  ;  iv.  5  ;  vii.  1 ;  viii.  2 ;  x.  3  ;  xii.  3  ;  xv.  1 ;  xvii.  9, 
10,  &c.).  It  should  be  observed  that  the  sacred  numbers  are  throughout 
parodied  by  the  anti-sacred  numbers. 

2  Men  (Dean  Plumptre  says)  of  the  Hymenseus,  Alexander,  and 
Philetus  type  (1  Tim.  i.  20 ;  2  Tim.  ii.  17).  In  the  days  of  Nero  there 
were  still  false  teachers,  who  called  themselves  "  Apostles  "  (2  Cor.  xi. 
13,  14).  It  is  tolerably  certain  that  there  were  none  in  the  days  of 
Domitian.  Hippolytus  (recently  discovered  in  an  Arabic  translation)  says 
that  they  were  "  Judaisers /?'om  Jerusalem,"  and  certainly  no  such  agents 
were  at  work  so  late  as  a.d.  95. 


242  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Nicolaitans,  and  the  teaching  of  Balaam,  who  taught 
Balak  to  cast  a  stumbllnsf-block  before  the  children  of 
Israel,  to  eat  things  offered  to  idols,  and  to  commit 
fornication."  The  Angel  of  the  Church  of  Thyatira 
is  blamed  for  "  suffering  the  woman  Jezebel^  to  seduce 
my  servants  to  commit  fornication,  and  to  eat  things 
sacrificed  to  idols."  The  Angel  of  the  Church  of  Phila- 
delphia is  promised  the  victory  "  over  the  s^magogue 
of  Satan,  of  them  which  say  they  are  Jews  and  they 
are  not,  but  do  lie." 

Little  is  known  about  the  special  characteristics 
of  the  heresies  here  alluded  to.  It  would  hardly  be 
necessary  to  notice  the  wild  guesses  respecting  them 
but  for  the  increasing  confidence  of  the  assertion  that 
these  expressions  are  aimed  at  St.  Paul  or  his  followers. 
St.  Paul  is  supposed  to  be  the  chief  of  the  heresiarchs, 
and  the  leader  of  those  who  falsely  claimed  to  be 
Apostles.^  In  other  words,  we  are  to  believe  that  the 
virtue  of  the  Ephesian  Church  consisted  in  casting 
forth  the  doctrines  and  adherents  of  its  glorious 
founder — of  the  Apostle  who  had  there  faced  martyr- 
dom, who  had  there  "  fought  with  beasts,"  who  had 
won  the  passionate  affection  of  the  first  presb}' ters,  who 
had  toiled  there  with  infinite  devotion  for  more  than 
two  years,  admonishing  them  night  and  day  with 
tears,  and  with  his  own  hands  ministering  to  their 
necessities.      The    whole   theory  is    monstrous.      The 

^  Or,  "  thy  wife  Jezebel,"  A,  B,  g,  Andreas,  &c.  Dean  Blakesley  pre- 
cariously identifies  Jezebel  with  the  Hebrew  sibyl  Sanibetlia,  who  was 
worshipped  at  Thyatira  (Smith's  Diet.  Bihl.  s.  v.  Thyatira).  If  "thy 
wife  "  be  the  true  reading,  it  presents  a  curious  parallel  to  the  state  of 
the  Pliilippian  Church  in  the  days  of  Polycarp.  In  liis  letter  to  the 
Philippians  (ch.  xi.),  he  speaks  of  the  wife  of  one  of  the  Presbyters,  named 
Valens,  who  was  guilty  of  much  tlie  same  wickedness  as  this  "  Jezebel." 

^  See  Volkmar,  Commentar  zur  Offenh.  pp.  79,  seqq. 


THE    TWELVE    APOSTLES.  243 

tone  of  deep  respect  in  wliicli  the  Asiatics  Polycarp 
and  Irenseus   speak  of  St.  Paul  is   alone  sufficient  to 
overthrow     it.         St.   Paul    himself    had    warned    his 
Churches  against  "  false  Apostles."     They  did  not,  of 
course,  pretend  to   he  of  the  number   of  the  Tiveloe ; 
neither    did    St.    Paul.     The    notion    that    St.    John 
jealously   excludes   St.    Paul   by   saying   that   on    the 
Twelve  foundation  stones  of  the  New  Jerusalem  were 
the  names  of  the  "  Twelve  Apostles  of  the  Lamb,"  is 
the   idlest   extravagance.       St.   Paul's    Apostolate    was 
neither   from   men,    nor   by   means    of   men.       Unless 
the    calm    and    definite    testimony    of    St.    Luke    is   to 
be    set    aside    for    the    fictions   of    nameless    heretics, 
the    Twelve,    and    St.    John    among    them,    had    ex- 
pressly   sanctioned    St.     Paul's    Apostolic    claim,    had 
given  him  their  right  hands  of  fellowship,  had  recog- 
nised    his    equality,    had    found    no    fault    with    his 
teaching,  had  sanctioned  his  independence  in  his  own 
wide    sphere   of    toil,   had  even    appealed    to    him    for 
sympathy  and  assistance  in  the  support  of  their  poor. 
Polycarp    was  the  hearer  and  devoted  admirer   of   St. 
John.     If  St.  John  had   been   actuated  by  a  fanatical 
horror   of  St.  Paul's    teaching,  would    Polycarp    have 
spoken  of  the  Apostle    as    "the  blessed   and  glorious 
Paul?"^ 

As  for  the  Nicolaitans,  we  know  of  no  excuse  for 
regarding  them  as  Paulinists,  even  if  we  admit  the 
absurd  notion  that  Kikolaos,  which  means  "  conquering 
the  people,"  is  a  Greek  translation  of  Bileam,  which  is 
precariously  rendered  "  corrupt  in  r/  i\\Q  people."^  The 
conduct  of  Balaam,  and  the  traditional  teaching  of  the 

'  Polyc.  Ep.  ad  rhilip.  3. 

^  Gesenius  and  Fiirst  explain  tlie  name  to  mean  "  Not  of  tlio  People," 


244  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

Deacon  Nicolas/  would  have  been  at  least  as  abhorrent 
to  St.  Paul  as  to  St.  John.  He  has  himself  again  and 
again  denounced  such  impure  and  Antinomian  tenets, 
in  language  as  powerful  as  and  more  profoundly  reasoned 
than  that  of  the  Apocalypse.  He  has  even  drawn  the 
same  warning  illustration  from  the  example  of  Balaam.^ 
To  say  that  in  any  sense,  literal  or  allegorical,  he  or 
any  one  of  his  genitine  followers  ever  seduced  Chris- 
tians to  fornication,  whether  in  the  form  of  tampering 
with  idolatry,  or  thinking  lightly  of  uncleanness,  is  to 
affix  a  wanton  calumny  on  one  of  the  purest  of  the 
saints  of  God.  If  it  be  true  that  any  Christians 
distorted  to  their  own  perdition,  or  to  that  of  others, 
his  doctrine  of  Christian  libert}'-,  he  was  himself  the 
first  to  utter  his  warning  against  such  perversions. 
Nor  did  he,  directly  or  indirectly,  induce  men  to  eat 
"  meat  offered  to  idols."  In  cases  where  the  conscience 
was  in  no  way  wounded  by  doing  so — in  the  instance 
of  those  who  were  firmly  convinced  that  an  idol  is 
nothing  in  the  world — where  the  meat  was  innocently 
bought  in  the  open  market,  or  eaten  in  the  ordinary 
intercourse    of   social   life — in   those    carefully  limited 

i.e.,  a  foreigner.  Yitringa  makes  it  mean  "  lord  of,"  and  Simonis  "  destruc- 
tion of  the  people."     In  no  sense  is  it  an  equivalent  of  Nikolaus. 

1  On  IS'it'olas,  see  my  Life  of  St.  Paul,  i.  133.  There  is  no  absolute 
proof  that  tlio  lierctic  was  the  Deacon,  but  Ii'enaeus  {Ilaer.  i.  26 ;  iii.  11)  and 
Hippolytus  (Haer.  vii.  36)  supposed  him  to  be  so.  Clemens  of  Alexandria 
{Strom,  ii.  20 ;  iii.  4)  tells  a  dubious  story  that  when  he  was  accused  of 
jealousy  of  his  beautiful  wife,  he  disproved  the  charge  in  a  very  strange 
and  unseemly  way.  He  is  the  reputed  author  of  the  rule  that  "  we  must 
abuse  tlio  Hesh  "  (on  Se?  irapaxpvo'dai  rfj  -rapKl),  which  might  convey  the 
innocent  meaning  that  stern  self-denial  was  requisite  to  repress  e\'il 
passions.  The  verb  was,  however,  capable  of  the  meaning  "  use  to  the 
full,"  and  possibly  some  may  have  founded  on  tliis  })hrase  the  wicked 
inference  that  criminal  passion  should  be  cured  by  unlimited  indulgence. 
See  Ewald,  Gesch.  vii.  172.  2  1  ^or  x.  7,  8. 


SUPPOSED  ATTACKS  ON  ST.  PAUL.       245 

circumstances  he  had  taught,  and  rightly  taught,  that 
the  matter  was  one  of  pure  indifference.  If  in  saying 
"  I  will  lay  on  you  none  other  burden,"  St.  John  meant 
(as  E-enan  says)  that  those  had  nothing  to  fear  who 
kept  the  concordat  arranged  at  the  Synod  of  Jerusalem 
(Acts  XV.),  it  is  strange  to  overlook  that  this  very  con- 
cordat had  only  been  won  by  the  genius,  the  energy, 
and  the  initiative  of  St.  Paul.  But  so  far  from  "  cast- 
ing a  stumbling-block  "  in  the  path  of  others,  he  had, 
on  the  contrary,  always  maintained,  as  his  Lord  had 
done  before  him,^  that  the  casting  of  stumbling-blocks 
— which  he  expressed  by  the  very  same  word  as 
St.  John — is  the  deadliest  of  crimes  against  Christian 
charity,^  and  that  it  would  be  better  to  eat  no  meat  of 
any  kind  while  the  world  lasted  than  to  cause  a  weak 
brother  to  offend. 

Again,  to  suppose  that  because  St.  John  (Rev.  ii.  24) 
reflects  severely  on  those  who  talked  of  "  knowing  the 
depths  of  Satan^'  he  must  necessarily  be  uttering  a 
malignant  sneer  against  St.  Paul,  who  had  spoken  of 
"  the  Spirit  searching  all  things,  yea,  even  the  depths  of 
God,"^  is  to  use  a  style  of  criticism  which  builds 
massive  systems  upon  pillars  of  smoke.  The  utmost 
which  we  could  infer  would  be  that  false  teachers 
had  distorted  and  parodied  the  expression  of  St.  Paul. 
The  single  grain  of  truth  in  the  whole  h^^pothesis  is 
that  St.  John  speaks  in  a  more  sweeping  and  less 
limited  way  than  St.  Paul  about  eating  "meats 
offered  to  idols."  It  was  natural  that  it  should  be 
so,  both  because  St.  John's  Judaic  training  had  given 

>  Matt,  xviii.  6,  8,  9  ;  Mark  ix.  43^7. 

2  1  Cor.  viii.  13 ;  x.  32  ;  2  Cor.  xi.  29 ;  Rom.  xiv.  21. 

^  1  Cor.  ii.  10 ;  comp.  Rom.  xi.  33. 


246  THE    EARLY   DAYS    01"   CHRISTIANITY. 

bim  a  deeper  instinctive  liorror  of  even  tlie  semblance 
of  participation  in  idolatry,  and  also  because  be  was 
writing  at  a  later  date  and  in  days  of  persecution, 
in  wbicli  tlie  act  itself  bad  acquired  a  more  marked 
significance.  Had  St.  Paul  been  writing  under  tbe 
same  circumstances  as  St.  Jolin,  be  would  bave  spoken 
no  less  strongly  on  tbe  sin  of  a  cowardly  conformity. 
To  eat  of  idol  offerings  in  cases  wbere  no  mistaken 
inferences  could  be  drawn  from  doing  so,  was  perfectly 
innocent ;  but  it  became  a  very  different  tbing  to  eat 
of  tbem  in  days,  like  tliose  of  tbe  Neronian  perse- 
cution or  tbose  of  Justin  Martyr,  wben  to  do  so 
meant  to  be  indifferent  to  tbe  sin  of  idolatry.  Tbis 
attempt  to  represent  tbe  Apostles  as  actuated  by  a 
burning  animosity  against  eacb  otber,  and  a  determi- 
nation to  "  write  eacb  otber  down,"  as  tbougb  tbey 
were  contributors  to  modern  religious  newspapers,  is  a 
total  failure.  It  is  time  it  were  dismissed.  Wben  tbe 
Apostles  differed  from  eacb  otber — as  we  know,  from  tbe 
Acts  of  tbe  Apostles  and  tbe  Epistle  to  tbe  Galatians, 
tbat  tbey  sometimes  did — it  was  only  in  tbe  spirit  of 
mutual  resjDect  and  affection  in  wbicb  Lutber  differed 
from  Melanctbon,  and  Bossuet  from  Fenelon.^ 

Tbe  false  Jews,  tbe  false  Apostles,  tbe  Nicolaitans, 
tbe  Balaamites,  were  immoral  sectarians,  wbetber  Judaic 
or  anti-Judaic,  against  wbom  St.  Paul  bad  before- 
band  warned  bis  Cburcbes,  very  mucb  as  St.  Jobn  bas 
done,  and  against  wbom  every  one  of  tbe  sacred  writers 
bas  lifted  up  bis  voice.  To  admit  tbat  St.  Jobn  could 
bave    written     sucb     railing    accusations     against    bis 

^  Luther,  as  a  friend  remiuds  ine.  is  sometimes  a  little  severe  upon 
"  PLilii)pismus,"  and  Bossuet  admitted  that  he  had  sometimes  argued  iu 
opposition  to  Feuelon  without  naming  him. 


THE    TUBINGEN    SCHOOL.  247 

glorious  brother  Apostle,  is  to  imply  that  lie  was  un- 
worthy to  be  an  Apostle,  or  a  sacred  writer  at  all. 
It  is  to  degrade  him  at  once  to  the  level  of  modern 
partisans.  The  early  Christians  had  not  yet  been 
taught  that  religion  consisted  in  breathing  the  atmos- 
j)here  of  faction,  slanderousness,  and  hate.  There  were 
some,  even  then,  "  who  preached  Christ  of  contention, 
supposing  to  add  affliction  to  St.  Paul's  bonds,"  and 
they  would  have  been  well  qualified  to  write  anonymous 
articles  of  unfair  and  unchristian  depreciation.  But 
they  incurred  a  stern  censure  from  the  lips  of  Christ's 
Apostle.  Such  orthodoxy  is  heterodoxy ;  such  religion 
is  irreligion ;  such  Christianity  is  worse  than  heathen- 
dom, and  is  no  Christianity  at  all. 

We  reach  the  culmination  of  these  exegetic  ab- 
surdities when  we  find  Volkmar  also  identifying  the 
Second  Wild  Beast  from  the  Land,  and  the  False 
Prophet  of  Eev.  xiii.  and  xvii.,  with  St.   Paul ! 

Writers  of  the  Tiibingen  School  were  so  enchanted 
with  their  discovery  that  the  struggle  between  Jewish 
and  Pauline  Christianity  was  longer  and  more  perma- 
nent than  had  been  supposed,  that  they  exaggerated 
the  significance  of  the  second  century  calumnies 
against  St.  Paul.  They  forgot  that  the  Clementines 
were  heretical,  and  that  these  Ebionite  attacks  were, 
after  all,  subterranean  and  pseudonymous.  As  for 
the  grounds  on  which  St.  Paul  is  identified  with  the 
False  Prophet — namely,  because  in  writing  to  the 
Romans^  he  taught  loyal  obedience  to  the  powers  that 
be  as  being  "ordained  of  God"" — Volkmar  surely 
forgets  that  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  on  this  subject 
was  the  normal  teaching  of  all  the   Apostles,   of  all 

1  Rom.  xiii.  1—7.  2  1  p^t.  ii.  13,  14—17. 


248  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

the  early  Christian  Fathers  and  Apologists,  nay,  more, 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Himself.  St.  Peter — writiner  in 
the  days  of  Nero — writing,  in  all  probability,  during  the 
Neronian  persecution,  had  not  only  said  "  Honour  the 
king,"  but  even  "  Submit  yourselves  unto  every  ordi- 
nance of  man  for  the  Lord's  sake,  whether  it  he  to  the 
king  as  supreme,  or  unto  governors,  as  unto  them  that 
are  aj^pointed  by  him  for  the  punishment  of  evil  doers, 
and  for  the  praise  of  them  that  do  well."  And  as  to 
the  Divine  authority  of  heathen  government,  St.  John 
himself  records  in  his  Gospel  how  our  Lord  said  to 
Pilate,  "  Thou  couldest  have  no  power  at  all  against 
me,  except  it  were  given  thee  from  above. "^  Indeed, 
such  teaching  was  so  obviously  based  on  common  sense 
and  common  duty,  that  even  after  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem — even  in  the  days  when  detestation  of  the 
Gentiles  had  been  reduced  to  something  like  a  system 
— Eabbi  Chanina  used  to  say,  "  Pray  for  the  established 
government,  for,  but  for  it,  men  would  devour  each 
other."2 

SECTION     II. 

THE    SEALS. 

After  the  letters  to  the  Seven  Churches  begins  the 
more  definitely  Apocalyptic  portion  of  the  book.  The 
Apostle  hears  a  voice  bidding  him  ascend  to  heaven,  and 
see  things  which  must  come  to  pass  after  these  things. 
Instantly,  in  an  ecstasy,  he  sees  a  throne  in  heaven,  en- 
circled by  an  emerald  rainbow,  whereon  was  seated  One 
whose  lustre  was  as  a  jasper  and  a  sardine.  Round  the 
throne  were  twenty-four  enthroned  elders,  representing 

'  Joliu  xix.  11.  -  Mechilta  ou  Exod.  xix.  1. 


THE    FIRST    SEAL.  249 

the  Patriarclis  of  the  redeemed  Church  of  both  dispensa- 
tions, arrayed  in  white  and  crowned  with  gold.  Out 
of  the  throne  came  an  incessant  rolling  of  thunders  and 
voices,  and  a  stream  of  lightnings;  and  before  it  there 
burned,  as  with  the  flame  of  seven  lamps,  the  sevenfold 
Spirit  of  God.  Before  the  Throne  flowed  a  glass}'-  sea 
of  crystal  brightness,  and  about  it  were  the  fourfold 
cherubim,  six-winged  and  full  of  eyes,  symbols  of  all 
that  is  most  perfect  in  creation,  hymning  the  perpetual 
Trisagion,  and  joining  in  the  endless  liturgy  of  prayer 
and  praise.  On  the  right  hand  of  Him  who  sat  on  the 
throne  was  a  book,  seven -sealed,  and  written  within  and 
without.  In  answer  to  the  appeal  of  an  angel  none 
is  found  worthy  to  open  the  book  but  the  Lion  of  the 
Tribe  of  Judah,  who  is  also  the  Lamb  that  was  slain. 
When  He  has  taken  the  book  there  is  a  fresh  outburst 
of  universal  triumph  and  blessing,  in  which  even  those 
join  who  are  "under  the  earth." ^ 

i.  The  Lamb  opens  one  of  the  seven  seals,  and  one 
of  the  Immortalities  cries  with  a  voice  of  thunder, 
"  Come  ! " 

Instantly  there  springs  forth  a  white  horse,  bearing 
a  rider  with  a  bow  in  his  hand,  to  whom  a  crown  is 
given,  and  who  goes  forth  conquering  and  to  conquer. 
It  is  a  symbol  of  the  Messiah  riding  forth  to  victory, 
but  armed  only  with  a  bow  to  smite  his  enemies,  not  as 
yet  in  close  conflict,  but  from  afar.^ 

But  the  coming  of  the  Messiah  was  to  be  ushered 

'  Verse  13,  comp.  Phil.  ii.  10.  With  the  vague  numbers  of  the  num- 
berless multitude  comp.  Dan.  vii.  10. 

^  Comp.  xix.  11.  Both  Victoriuus,  in  liis  commentary,  and  Tertullian 
{de  Cor.  Mil.  15)  understand  the  Rider  of  the  White  Horse  to  bo  Christ. 
The  wliite  horse  is  a  sign  of  victory  (Virg.  Mn.  iii.  537).  The  symbol  of 
tlie  bow  is,  perhaps,  derived  fi'om  Pss.  vii.  13,  xlv.  6. 


250  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

in  by  the  woes  which  are  the  travail-pangs  of  a  new 
dispensation. 

ii.  The  Lamb  opens  the  Second  Seal,  and  the  second 
Immortality  cries  "  Come  !  " 

Instantly  2^ fiery  horse — a  horse  red  as  blood  ^ — leaps 
forth,  whose  rider  is  armed  with  a  great  sword.  It  is 
the  symbol  of  War.  To  him  it  is  given  to  take  peace 
from  the  earth,  and  that — as  in  the  fierce  conflicts 
between  Otho  and  Vitellius,  between  Vitellius  and 
Vespasian,  between  the  Jews  and  the  Romans,  between 
John  of  Giscala  and  Simon  —  men  should  slay  one 
another  in  internecine  and  civil  discord.  It  was  an 
epoch  of  wars  and  massacres.  There  had  been  massacres 
in  Alexandria ;  massacres  at  Seleucia ;  massacres  at 
Jamnia;  massacres  at  Damascus;  massacres  at  Ca^sarea ; 
massacres  at  Bedriacum.  There  had  been  wars  in 
Britain,  wars  in  Armenia,  wars  in  Gaul,  wars  in  Italy, 
wars  in  Arabia,  wars  in  Parthia,  wars  in  Judea.  Dis- 
banded soldiers  and  marauding  troops  filled  the  world 
with  rapine,  terror,  and  massacre.  The  world  was  like 
an  Aceldama,  or  field  of  blood.  The  red  horse  and 
its  rider  are  but  a  visible  image  of  the  words  of  our 
Lord — "  For  nation  shall  rise  against  nation,  and  king- 
dom against  kingdom  ;  "  and  "  Ye  shall  hear  of  wars 
and  rumours  of  wars,  which  things  are  the  beginning 
of  the  birth-throes."^ 

iii.  The  Lamb  opens  the  Third  Seal,  and  the  third 
Immortality  utters  the  word  "  Come  !  " 

Instantly  a   hlack  horse  leaps  forth.     Its   rider   is 

^   2  KiugS  iii.  22,  -rrvp^h.  cJs  aXfxa.. 

2  Miitt.  xxiv.  4,  7.  Fur  corroborativo  authorities  see  Jos.  Anit.  x^^ii. 
;\  §  9;  xix.  1,  §  2;  B.  J.  ii.  17;  x.  18  (where  he  says  that  "a  terriWe 
disturbance  prevailed  througliout  Syria,  and  every  city  had  beeu  divided 
iuto  two  camps") ;  Tacitus  aud  Suetouius  jjosswh. 


THE    THIRD    SEAL.  251 

unarmed,  but  holds  in  his  hand  a  balance  ;  and  by  way 
of  explanation  a  voice  is  heard  from  among  the  four 
Immortalities  saying,  "  A  cboenix  of  wheat  for  a 
denarius,  and  three  of  barley  for  a  denarius."  The 
rider  is  Famine.  A  cboenix  was  less  than  a  quart, 
and  was  the  minimum  allowance  for  a  day's  food,^  yet 
it  was  to  cost  a  whole  day's  wages  ;^  and  a  third  of  the 
same  price  was  to  be  given  for  even  so  coarse  a  grain 
as  barley — a  food  to  which  Roman  soldiers  Avere  only 
degraded  by  way  of  punishment.  Thus  wheat  and 
barley  were  to  rise  to  twenty  times  their  usual  price, 
to  the  infinite  distress  of  men. 

"He  calls  for  Famine,  and  the  eagei'  fiend 
Blows  poisonous  mildew  from  his  shrivelled  lips. 
And  taints  the  golden  ear."^ 

It  was  an  epoch  of  constant  famines.  The  de- 
pendence of  Eome  and  Italy  upon  Alexandria  for  corn 
caused  bitter  and  constant  distress.  In  the  reign  of 
Claudius  the  famine  and  its  accompanying  prodigies 
had  been  deemed  an  omen,  and  only  fifteen  days'  food 
had  been  left  in  Rome.*  About  this  very  time,  a.d.  68 — 
in  the  midst  of  Nero's  impotent  buffooneries — the  people, 
already  burdened  by  famine  prices,  were  nearly  mad- 
dened by  the  discovery  that  a  ship  from  Alexandria, 
which  had  been  mistaken  for  one  of  the  famous  wheat- 
ships,  had  a  lading  of  sand  with  which  to  strew  the 
amphitheatre.^     The  overflow  of  the  Tiber,  early  in  the 

^  Herod,  vii.  187;  Diog.  Laert.  viii.  18. 

2  Matt.  XX.  2;  xxiv.  7 ;  Mark  xiii.  7;  Tac.  Ann.  i.  1.  lu  Sicily,  iu  the 
day  of  Cicero,  twelve  chcenixes  of  wheat  could  be  bought  for  a  denarius 
(Cic.  Verr.  iii.  81),  aud  therefore  thirty-six  of  barley.  ^  Co^v^)er. 

*  Tac.  Ann.  xii.  43 :  "  frugum  egestas  et  orta  ex  eo  fames."  Suet. 
Claud.  18,  "  assiduae  sterilitates."    (Comp.  Jos.  Antt.  iii.  15,  §  3.) 

''  Suet.  Ner.  46. 


a52  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

reiga  of  Otlio,  caused,  as  Tacitus  says,  famine  among  the 
common  people,  and  a  scarcity  of  the  commonest 
elements  of  life.^  It  was  the  deliberate  object  of 
Vespasian  to  cause  famine  and  dissensions  at  Rome  by 
stopping  the  supplies  of  provisions,  nor  did  he  let  the 
corn-ships  sail  till  only  ten  days'  supply  was  left  in  the 
cit3^^  In  Jerusalem,  during  the  final  state  of  siege  which 
was  now  rapidly  approaching,  the  anguish  and  horror  of 
the  famine  were  unspeakable.  Josephus  tells  us  that 
many  sold  their  all  for  a  single  choenix  of  wheat  if  they 
were  rich,  of  barley  if  they  were  poor,  and  shut  them- 
selves up  in  the  inmost  recesses  of  their  houses  to  eat  it 
raw  ;  and  that  many  had  to  undergo  unspeakable  tortures 
to  make  them  confess  that  they  had  but  one  loaf  of 
bread,  or  so  much  as  a  handful  of  barley  meal.^  Terribly 
— both  in  Italy  and  in  Judaea — did  the  fearful  rider  of 
the  black  horse  do  his  appointed  work !  He  is  a  visible 
symbol  of  the  Lord's  words — "  There  shall  be  famines 
.  in  divers  places."^ 
But  the  third  Immortality  added  the  strange  words, 
"  And  the  oil  and  the  wine  hurt  thou  not."  Oil  and 
wine  are  not  necessaries  but  luxuries.  It  is  as  though 
he  had  said,  "In  the  wild  anguish  of  famine  let  their 
pangs  be  aggravated  by  having  the  needless  accessories 
of  abundance."  So  it  was — strange  to  say — in  both 
the  places  on  which  the  Seer's  eye  is  mainly  fixed, 
Jerusalem  and  Eome.  In  Jerusalem,  while  myriads 
were  starving,  John  of  Giscala  and  his  Zealots  had 
access  to  the  sacred  stores  of  wine  and  oil  in  the  Temple, 
and  wasted  it  with  reckless  extravagance,^  and  Simon's 

'  Tac.    H.   i.   86 :    "  fames   in  volgus,    iuopia   quaestus,    et   peuuria 
alimeutorum  "  (Suet.  Otho,  8).  «  ^.^^  jj  iii  48;  iv.  62. 

3  Jos.  B.  J.  V.  10,  §  2.  ■«  Matt.  xxiv.  7. 

="  Jos.  B.J.  V.  13,  §  6;  1,  §  t. 


THE    FOURTH    SEAL.  253 

followers  were  even  hindered  from  fighting  by  their 
perpetual  drunkenness.  In  Eome  immense  abundance 
of  wine  was  a  frequent  concomitant  of  extreme  scarcity 
of  corn.  So  marked  was  the  evil,  that  Domitian  en- 
deavoured to  secure  by  edict  the  diminution  of  the 
vinelands,  and  the  devotion  of  wider  areas  to  the 
cultivation  of  cereals  for  human  food.^ 

iv.  The  Lamb  opens  the  Fourth  Seal.  The  fourth 
Immortality  utters  his  solemn  "  Come !  " 

Instantly  a  livid  horse  leaps  forth.  His  rider  is 
Death  ;  and  Hades  follows  to  receive  the  prey.  They 
usher  in  a  crowd  of  calamities  over  a  quarter  of  the 
earth — sword,  and  famine,  and  pestilence,  and  wild 
beasts.  Sword  and  famine  had  done  part  of  their 
work;  pestilence  and  the  increase  of  wild  beasts 
naturally  follow  them.  God's  four  sore  judgments 
usually  go  hand  in  hand.^  Christ  had  already  said  of 
these  days  that  there  should  be  famines  and  pestilences, 
as  well  as  wars  aud  rumours  of  wars.  Apart  from  the 
inevitable  prevalence  of  wild  beasts  in  places  where  the 
inhabitants  are  thinned  and  weakened  by  calamity,  an 
incredible  number  of  human  beings  were  yearly  sacri- 
ficed to  wild  beasts  in  the  bloody  shows  of  the  amphi- 
theatres, not  only  at  Rome  but  throughout  all  the 
provinces.  Lions  and  tigers  were  literally  fed  with 
men.^  A  pestilence  at  Rome  carried  off  30,000  in  a 
single  year.*     At  Jerusalem  there  was  from  these  com- 

1  Suet.  Bom.  7. 

2  Ezek.  xiv.  21 ;  Matt.  xxiv.  6,  8 ;  Mark  xiii.  7,  8. 

^  Hence  one  of  the  wild  plans  of  revenge  whicli  cliased  each  otLer 
across  the  brain  of  Nero  on  his  last  day  of  life,  was  to  let  loose  upon 
the  paople  the  wild  beasts  of  the  amphitheatre.  Suet.  Ner.  43  :  "  urbem 
incoadere  feris  in  populum  immissis." 

*  Suet.  Ner.  39 ;  Tac.  Ann.  xvi.  13. 


254  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

bined  causes  "a  glut  of  mortality"  almost  incredible. 
It  was  calculated  that  upwards  of  a  million  perished  in 
the  siege,  and  Manna^us,  son  of  Lazarus,  told  Titus 
that  even  before  the  Romans  encamped  under  the 
walls,  he  had  seen  115,880  corpses  carried  through 
one  single  gate.^ 

V.  The  Lamb  opens  the  Fifth  Seal. 

Immediately  under  the  golden  altar  of  incense 
before  the  throne,  are  seen  the  souls  of  the  "  great  mul- 
titude "  who  had  perished  "  for  the  word  of  Grod  and 
for  the  testimony  which  they  held,"^  some  at  Jerusalem, 
some  in  the  provinces,  but  most  of  all  in  the  Neronian 
persecution  at  Rome.  They  are  impatiently  appealing 
for  vengeance  and  judgment.^  Hero  after  hero  had 
fallen  in  the  Christian  warfare.  Apostle  after  Apostle 
had  been  sent  to  his  dreadful  martyrdom.  St.  Peter 
had  been  crucified  ;  St.  Paul  beheaded  ;  St.  James  the 
Elder  beheaded ;  St.  James,  the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem, 
hurled  down  and  beaten  to  death ;  hundreds  of  others 
burnt,  or  tortured,  or  torn  to  pieces  in  the  gardens  of 
Nero  and  in  the  Roman  circus  ;  yet  no  Deliverer  flashed 
from  the  morning  clouds.  How  long,  oh  Lord,  how 
long  !  AVhen  all  the  world  is  arrayed  against  Thy  saints, 
must  not  deliverance  assume  the  inevitable  guise  of 
temporal  vengeance  ? — White  robes  are  given  them,  and 
they  are  bidden  to  wait  till  the  number  of  the  martyrs 
is  complete,  till  their  brethren  who  are  still  on  earth 

1  Sec  Jos.  B. /.  V.  12,  §3;  13,  §7. 

-  Rev.  vi.  9  ;  vii.  13  ;  xvii.  6 ;  xx.  4. 

^  This  has  been  variously  excused  by  different  commentators.  "  Nou 
hiiec  odio  iuimicorura,"  says  Bede,  "  pro  qnibns  in  hoc  saeculo  rogav- 
erunt,  orant,  sed  amore  aeqnitatis."  Bengel  explains  their  impatience 
as  zeal  for  the  trutli  and  lioliness  of  the  Lord  (comp.  Ps.  Ixxiv.  19;  Luke 
xviii.  7,  8). 


THE    FIFTH    AND    SIXTH    SEALS.  255 

sliall  have  fulfilled  their  course.^  They  are  those  of 
whom  Christ  had  prophesied  when  he  said  "  Then  " — 
after  the  "  beginning  of  sorrows  " — "  shall  they  deliver 
you  up  to  be  afflicted,  and  shall  kill  you."  The  time 
had  come  for  judgment  to  begin  at  the  throne  of 
God.  Meanwhile  the  fire  of  olden  prophecy  was  re- 
kindled for  their  inspiration,  and  they  found  that  the 
more  they  were  trodden  down  the  more  did  they  feel 
the  conviction  of  glorious  triumph,  and  the  exultation 
of  inward  peace.  They  who  have  an  invisible  King 
to  sustain  them,  and  a  John  to  utter  His  messages, 
may  brave  the  banded  forces  of  secular  despotism  and 
religious  hatred — and  may  stand  undismayed  between 
a  Zealot-maddened  Jerusalem  and  a  Neronian  Rome. 
If  the  judgment  began  with  Christians,  what  should 
be  the  end  of  those  who  obeyed  not  the  Grospel  of 
God?  2 

vi.  The  Lamb  opens  the  Sixth  Seal. 

Instantly  there  are  all  the  signs  which  usher  in  a 
Day  of  the  Lord.  The  darkened  sun,  the  lurid  moon, 
the  showers  of  meteors,  the  shrivelling  heavens,  the 
terror  with  which  men  call  on  the  rocks  and  mountains 
to  fall  on  them  and  hide  them,  are  the  metaphors  of 
vast  earthly  changes  and  catastrophes.  At  first  sight 
it  might  well  seem  as  if  they  could  describe  nothing 
short  of  the  final  conflagration  and  ruin  of  the  globe. 
But  there  is  not  one  of  these  metaphors  which  is  not 
found  in  the  Old  Testament  Prophets,^   and  in  them 

^  Comp.  Enoch  eiy.  1 — 3.  "Ye  rigliteous,  .  .  .  your  cries  have  cried  for 
vengeance  .  .  .  wait  with  patient  Jwpe.^'  See  too  Gen.  iv.  10;  Job  xvi., 
xix. ;   Is.  xxvi.  21 ;  2  Esdras  xv.  8,  etc. 

2  1  Pet.  iv.  17. 

3  See  Is.  ii.  12,  19 ;  xiii.  10;  xxxiv.  3,  4;  1.  3 ;  Ixiii.  4 ;  Jer.  iv.  23—26  ; 
Ezck.  xxxii.  7,  8;  Joel  ii.  10,  31;  iii.  4,  15;  Hos.  x.  8;  Nah.  i.  G;  Mai. 


256  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

they  refer  in  every  instance  to  the  destruction  of  cities 
and  the  estabhshment  of  new  covenants,  or  to  other 
earthly  revolutions.  Not  only  had  our  Lord  adopted 
these  vivid  Oriental  symbols  to  describe  the  signs  of 
His  Coming  in  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  close  of 
the  old  a3on,  but  he  had  expressly  said  that  "  ihls  (gene- 
ration shall  not  pass  av-ay  until  all  these  things  be  ful- 
Jilled."^  It  is  clear,  therefore — as  'nearly  every  school 
of  interpreters  has  seen — that  they  are  but  a  descrip- 
tion, in  the  language  of  Eastern  poetry  and  metaphor, 
of  an  age  terrified  alike  b}^  political  crises  and  physical 
calamities.  Such  a  description  accords  exactlj'-  with 
the  reality.  In  the  sudden  collapse  of  the  deified  line 
of  the  Julii,  who  had  governed  them  for  four  genera- 
tions, the  Eomans  saw  an  omen  which  seemed  to 
threaten  the  world  with  destruction.^  There  reigned 
everywhere  a  universal  terror.^  Throughout  the  length 
and  breadth  of  the  Roman  Empire,  but  most  of  all  in 
Judaea,  in  the  midst  of  the  violent  revolutionar}^  move- 
ments which  marked  the  day,  men's  hearts  were  failing 
them  for  fear."^ 

vii.  Then,  before  the  opening  of  the  Seventh  Seal, 
there  is  a  pause.  The  Angels  of  the  winds  had  been 
bidden  to  prevent  their  ravages^  until  the  servants  of 

iii.  2,  die.  The  extent  to  which  the  Apostle  borrows  the  phrases  of  the 
Old  Testa inont  may  be  seen  by  taking  Rev.  i.  12 — 17,  and  comparing  it 
phrase  by  plirase  with  Zech.  iv.  2 ;  Dan.  vii.  13 ;  x.  5  ;  ^'ii.  9  ;  x.  6,  11.  12 ; 
Is.  xlix.  2  ;  Ez'^k.  xliii.  2. 

J  Matt.  xxiv.  29—34.  -  See  Tac.  E.  i.  11.  3  L^ke  xxiii.  36. 

*  Here,  if  any  one  believes  that  the  Apocalyptic  symbols  are  infi- 
nitely plastic,  ho  may  hold  with  Godet  that  the  seals  foreshadow  "  all 
the  wars,  all  the  famines,  all  the  persecutions,  all  the  e:irthqu:ikes,  etc., 
which  the  earth  has  seen  or  will  see  until  the  last  scene  for  which  the 
trumpets  give  the  signal." 

^  Among  other  things  they  are  forbidden  "  to  hurt  amy  tree,'"  vii.  1 
(comp.  ix.  -t).     The  Jews  felt  deeply  (ho  destruction  of  all  the  trees  in  the 


THE   SEALING.  257 

God  are  sealed  upon  their  foreheads  by  the  Angel  from 
the  sunrising.  The  seal  is  doubtless  the  cross  of 
baptism,  just  as  in  Ezekiel  (ix.  4,  6)  those  alone  are  to 
be  spared  from  slaughter  who  have  "the  sign  Thau," 
— that  is  the  cross — upon  their  foreheads.^  A  purely- 
ideal  number  are  sealed — namely,  twelve  times  twelve 
thousand — twelve  thousand  from  each  of  the  twelve 
tribes.  The  tribe  of  Dan  is  alone  omitted,  probably 
because  it  had  almost  disappeared  from  the  annals  of 
Israel.^  Besides  these,  the  seer  beheld  an  innumerable 
multitude  of  every  nation,  and  all  tribes  and  peoples  and 
tongues  arrayed  in  white  and  with  palms  in  their  hands. 
One  of  the  elders  tells  bim  ^  that  these  are  they  who 
came  "  out  of  the  great  tribulation  " — that  is,  the  Nero- 
nian  persecution — and  have  washed  their  robes  and 
made  them  white  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb.  The  whole 
company  are  "the  elect  gathered  together  from  the 
four  winds,  from  one  end  of  heaven  to  the  other."  *  The 
144,000  seem  to  represent  the  ideal  Israel.  The  "  num- 
berless multitude,"  which  is  almost  the  identical  expres- 
sion used  of  the  Neronian  martyrs  alike  by  Tacitus  and 
b}^  Clemens  Eomanus,^  are  those  who  have  died  for  the 

neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  during  the  Jewish  war.  Rabbi  Toehanan 
said,  "  The  Holy  One — blessed  be  He ! — will  in  future  replace  every 
acacia  which  the  heathen  have  taken  away  from  Jerusalem."  He  supported 
this  by  Is.  xli.  19,  saying  that  "  the  wilderness  "  (Is.  Ixiv.  10)  was  meant 
to  indicate  Jerusalem  (Rosh  Hashan'ah,  f.  23.  a). 

1  The  ancient  form  of  the  letter  Thau  was  + 

2  It  is  not  worth  while  to  repeat  all  the  idle  conjectures  about  this 
point.  The  Targum  of  Jonathan  on  Ex.  xvii.  8  represents  Dan  as  "  a  sinner 
from  the  beginning  "—a  tribe  thoroughly  idolatrous  (see  Ewald,  Gesch.  i. 
490).  Simeon  is  omitted  in  Deut.  xxxiii.,  and  Dan  in  I  Chron.  iv.  After 
1  Chron.  xxviii.  22  it  is  not  mentioned.  Levi  is  here  counted  as  one  of  the 
tribes,  because  all  the  Lord's  true  people  are  now  priests. 

3  Cf.  Zech.  iv.  4,  5. 

■•  Matt.  xxiv.  31.  ^  oxA.os  ttoXvs,  "  ingens  multitudo." 


258  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

truth  of  Christ,  whose  souls  St.  John  has  abeady  seen 
in  shadowy  throngs  beneath  the  altar. 

viii.  We  still  await  in  dread  expectation  the  opening 
of  the  Seventh  Seal.  But  when  it  is  opened  there  is  a 
pause  of  terrified  astonishment,  a  silence  for  half  an  hour 
in  Heaven,  as  though  the  dwellers  in  Heaven  drew  their 
breath  in  anguish  of  expectation.  It  is  like  the  awful 
pause  before  the  hurricane,  when  we  hear  "  the  destroy- 
ing Angels  murmuring  together  as  they  draw  their 
swords  in  the  distance,"  and  "the  questioning  in  ter- 
rified stillness  of  the  forest  leaves  which  way  the  wind 
shall  come."  For  hitherto  the  judgments  of  the  earth 
have  only  been  seen  in  Heaven  by  the  shadowy  images 
of  those  who  went  forth  for  their  accomplishment ;  but 
now  are  to  be  seen  the  very  judgments  themselves. 
There  are  seven  Angels  ^ — 

" the  Seven 
Wlio  iu  God's  presence,  nearest  to  His  throne 
Stand  ready  at  command,  and  are  His  eyes 
That  run  through  all  the  Heavens,  and  down  to  the  earth 
Bear  His  swift  errands." 

To  these  Angels  are  given  seven  Trumpets  to  blow  the 
signals  of  doom."  The  results  that  follow  the  blast  of 
their  seven  trumpets  practically  form  the  issue  of  the 
breaking  of  the  seventh  Seal.  But  the  troubles  which 
follow  are  neither  definite,  nor  continuous,  nor  rigidly 
historical.  They  closely  resemble  those  which  have 
followed  at  the  opening  of  the  sixth  Seal,  only  that  these 
trumpet  calamities  affect  a  third,  and  not  a  fourth,  part 

^  See  Tobit  xii.  15 ;  Dan.  x.  13 ;  Zech.  iv.  10.  The  names  are  given 
differently  in  the  Book  of  Enoch,  the  Targum  of  Jonathan,  and  otlier 
sources  (see  Gfrorer,  Jahib.  d.  Heils,  i.  361). 

2  Comp.  1  Cor.  XV.  52 ;  4  Esdr.  v.  3 ;  Matt.  xxiv.  31. 


THE  TRUMPETS.  259 

of  the  earth/  They  indicate  the  widening  spread  and 
deepening  intensity  of  judgment;  and  although  it  is 
not  possible  to  point  out  in  chronological  sequence  the 
exact  events  which  they  describe  in  hyperbolic  sym- 
bolism, they  resemble  those  signs  in  the  sun,  the  moon, 
the  stars,  and  the  sea  by  which  the  Lord  on  the  Mount 
of  Olives  had  shadowed  forth  the  troubles  of  the  ap- 
proaching end.  The  language  is  also  coloured  by 
reminiscences  of  the  Plagues  of  Eg3^pt.^  Further,  it 
must  be  borne  in  mind  that  to  the  eye  of  the  seer  the 
outlines  of  time  are  indistinct,  and  there  is  a  com- 
mingling of  tlie  events  of  the  present  and  the  immediate 
past  with  those  of  the  instantly  anticipated  future.  The 
repetition  of  the  vision  of  judgment  in  various  forms  is 
one  of  the  recognised  Hebrew  methods  of  expressing 
their  certainty.  The  same  general  calamities  are  indi- 
cated by  diverse  symbols.  Let  it  not  be  supposed  that 
there  is  anything  novel  in  this  view.  On  the  contrary, 
it  is  found  as  far  back  as  the  close  of  the  third  century, 
in  the  most  ancient  of  all  the  extant  Scholia  on  the 
Apocalypse — those  by  St.  Victorinus  of  Pettau,  who 
was  martyred  in  the  days  of  Diocletian.^  He  regards 
the  visions  as  mainly  retrogressive  and  iterative.  "  The 
phials,"  he  says,  "  are  a  supplement  of  what  he  said  of 
the  trumpets.  We  must  not  regard  the  mere  order 
of  the    statements,   for  the  Holy  Spirit,  after   he  has 


^  The  "third  part"  is  evidently  a  general  expression,  as  in  Zeeh.  xiii. 
9.     It  probably  indicates  the  Roman  Empire  (ix.  18 ;  xii.  6). 

^  See  Luke  xxi.  25. 

^  See  Aug.  De  Civ.  Dei,  xx.  14.  So  too  Andreas,  Corn,  il  Lapide, 
Vitringa,  Bengel,  and  many  commentators  of  all  schools,  including 
writers  so  unlike  each  other  as  Bossuet,  Ewald,  De  Wette,  and  Rouss, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  Elliott,  Wordsworth,  and  Hengstonberg,  on  the 
otlier. 

r  2 


260  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

advanced  to  the  end  of  tlic  latest  time,  often  returns  to 
the  same  time  again,  and  supplies  all  which  was  before 
partially  stated."  And  just  before  this  passage,  he  says, 
"  that  though  the  seer  repeats  by  the  vials  (what  had 
been  implied  by  the  trumpets)  this  does  not  imply  a 
repetition  of  the  fact,  but  is  a  twofold  statement  of  a 
single  decreed  event."  There  is  fair  reason  to  suppose 
that  Victorinus  derived  this  valuable,  and  by  no  means 
obvious,  principle  of  interpretation  from  early,  and 
perhaps  from  Apostolic  tradition. 

SECTION     III. 

THE    TRUMPETS. 

Before  the  seven  Angels  sound,  another  Angel, 
standing  at  the  altar,  mixes  abundant  incense  in  a  golden 
censer  with  the  prayers  of  the  saints.  Some  at  least  of 
these  prayers  are  represented  as  having  been  a  unani- 
mous crj'-  for  speedy  vengeance.  In  answer  to  these, 
the  Angel  takes  the  censer,  fills  it  with  fire  from  the 
altar,  and  hurls  it  upon  the  earth,  which  echoes  back 
its  crashing  fall  in  thunderings,  lightnings,  voices, 
and  earthquakes.  Such  thunderings  and  lightnings 
and  earthquakes  were,  according  to  Tacitus  and  Sue- 
tonius, characteristic  of  the  epoch.  I  have  alread}^ 
quoted  the  solemn  language  in  which  Tacitus  sum- 
marises the  manifold  calamities  of  this  ver}'-  period.^ 
Speaking  of  the  day  on  which  Gfalba  adopted  Piso 
— Jan.  10,  A.D.  G9 — he  says  that  the  da}^  was  foul 
with  rain-storms,  and  disturbed  beyond  natural  wont 
with  thunders,  lightnings,  and  the  threats  of  heaven^'  ^ — 

1  Tac.  jff.  i.  3.     It  had  long  been  customary  to  connect  such  phenomena 
with  political  events  (Cie.  Be  Div.  i.  18;  Suet.  Aug.  94). 
-  Tac.  H.  i.  18. 


THE   FIRST   TRUMPET.  261 

omens  which  he  blames  Galba  for  neglecting.  Speaking 
a  few  years  earlier,  he  observes  that  "  never  had  the 
storms  of  lightning  flashed  with  more  frequent  violence;"^ 
and  this  he  mentions  among  the  prodigies  which  were 
the  indication  of  imminent  calamities.  In  Asia,  where 
St.  John  was  writing,  the  era  might  well  be  called  the 
era  of  earthquakes.  "Nowhere  in  the  whole  world," 
says  Solinus,  "  are  earthquakes  so  constant  and  cities  so 
frequently  overthrown."  They  are  referred  to  again  and 
again  by  all  the  writers  and  historians  of  the  age.^ 

i.  Then  the  first  Angel  sounded.  Hail  followed,  and 
fire  mingled  with  blood,  and  a  third  part  of  the  surface 
of  the  earth,  with  its  grass  and  trees,  was  scorched  up.^ 
They  are  but  the  beginning  of  the  worse  hail  (xvi.  21) 
and  fire  (xx.  9)  and  blood  (xiv.  20)  which  are  to  follow. 
They  point  to  years  of  burning  drought  and  rains  of 
blood,'^  and  to  disastrous  conflagrations,  such  as  those 
at  Lyons,  Rome,  and  Jerusalem,  and  to  fierce  storms  of 
hail— such  as  so  often  destroy  in  a  few  hours  the  vine- 
yards of  Lombardy — and  to  scenes  of  human  bloodshed. 

^  Tac.  Ann.  xv.  47. 

2  Dion  Cass.  Lxvi.  2a— 24 ;  Jos.  Antt.  xv.  5,  §  2 ;  B.J.  1.  19,  §  3 ;  iv. 
4,  §  5 ;  Tac.  Ann.  ii.  47 ;  iv.  13 ;  xii.  43—58 ;  xiv.  27 ;  Sen.  Qu.  Nat.  vi. 
1 ;  Suet.  Tib.  74,  Ner.  20;  Juv.  Sat.  vi.  411 ;  Carm.  Sib.  iii.  471 ;  Strabo, 
xii.  8,  §  16,  &c.  Seneca  exclaims,  "  How  often  have  the  cities  of  Asia, 
how  often  those  of  Achaia,  fallen  by  one  shock  !  How  many  towns  in 
Syria,  how  many  in  Macedonia,  have  been  devoured !  .  .  .  .  Often  have 
the  ruins  of  whole  cities  been  announced  to  us  "  [Ep.  91). 

^  See  Ex.  ix.  22 ;  Joel  ii.  3.  The  reference  to  the  destruction  of  trees 
in  the  Apocalypse  may  be  due  to  the  terrible  destruction  of  the  trees  and 
the  vegetation  of  Palestine  in  the  Jewish  war,  especially  round  Jerusalem ; 
a  destruction  from  which  it  has  never  recovered.  The  "third  part "  may, 
as  we  have  seen,  vaguely  correspond  to  the  Roman  Empire. 

*  Liv.  xxxix.  46  ;  and  often  mentioned  among  Roman  portents.  Dion 
Cassius  (Ixiii.  26)  mentions  such  a  rain  in  A.D.  68,  and  says  that  "  the 
lilood  " — really  a  natural  phenomena,  which  happened  at  Naples  so  late  as 
1869 — discoloured  even  the  streams. 


262  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

And  we  must  once  more  remind  the  reader  tliat  these 
storms  and  prodigies,  so  far  from  being  peculiar  to  the 
Apocalypse,  or  understood  in  a  peculiar  significance,  are 
referred  to  in  very  similar  terms  and  explained  in  a  very 
similar  way  by  other  Christian,  heathen,  and  Jewish 
writers.  Speaking  of  the  earthquake  of  a.d.  G3,  Dion 
Cassius,  reflecting  the  impression  of  contemporaries, 
calls  it  the  "  greatest  that  had  ever  happened."  Can  we 
be  surprised  if,  in  a  book  which  reads  like  a  hundred- 
fold reverberation  of  older  prophecies,  the  contemporary 
phenomena  are  depicted  in  the  same  imagery  as  that 
which  had  been  used  in  their  day  by  the  Prophets  of 
Judah  and  Israel  to  describe  the  calamities  which  were 
then  happening  before  their  eyes  ?  Is  the  language  of 
St.  John  about  contemporary  calamities  anything  like 
so  hyperbolical  as  that  in  which  the  Prophet  Joel  had 
described  the  ravages  produced  by  a  plague  of  locusts  ? 
It  is  only  to  the  tamer  and  colder  imagination  of 
Teutonic  races  that  such  terms  sound  hyperbolical  if 
applied  to  anything  short  of  the  final  consummation. 

ii.  The  second  Angel  sounds,  and  something  which 
resembles  a  burning  mountain  is  flung  down  into  the  sea, 
and  the  third  part  of  the  sea  is  turned  into  blood,  and 
the  third  part  of  the  fish  die,  and  the  third  part  of  the 
ships  is  destroyed.  The  image  is  original.  St.  John 
may  have  derived  this  terrific  picture  of  "  a  burning 
mountain  cast  into  the  sea  "  either  from  seeing  the  lurid 
flashes  that  leap  up  night  and  day  from  the  cone  of 
Stromboli,  which  he  may  have  passed  in  a  voyage  to 
Rome,  or  more  probably  from  seeing  on  the  horizon, 
as  he  gazed  from  Patmos,  the  dense  smoke  vomited  from 
the  burning  island-mountain  of  Thera,  the  modern  San- 
torin.     Tlie  notion  of  seas  and  rivers  turned  into  blood 


THE   SECOND  TRUMPET.  263 

by  way  of  punishing  the  guilty  is  well  known  to  the 
imagery  of  the  Prophets  and  Apocryphal  writers.^  The 
language  is  obviously  that  of  daring  symbolism.  Taken 
literally,  the  fall  of  the  burning  mountain  resembles  no 
event  ever  seen  or  known  in  the  history  of  the  world. 
Taken  metaphorically,  it  may  be  meant  to  depict  great 
calamities  connected  with  the  sea  and  ships,  deaths  by 
drowning  and  massacre  which  "  incarnadined  the  multi- 
tudinous seas."  The  times  of  Nero  furnished  abundant 
instances.  Such  were  the  inundation  which  devastated 
the  coasts  of  Lydia,  and  the  destruction  of  fleets,  and  the 
waves  reddened  with  the  blood  of  men,  as  at  Joppa,  and 
on  the  coasts  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  on  the  Lake  of  Gali- 
lee. At  Joppa,  "  the  sea  was  bloody  a  long  way,  and 
the  maritime  parts  were  full  of  dead  bodies ;  and  the 
number  of  bodies  that  were  thus  thrown  out  of  the  sea 
was  four  thousand  two  hundred,"^  At  Tarichese  "one 
might  see  the  Lake  of  Galilee  all  bloody,  and  full  of  dead 
bodies  .  .  .  and  the  shores  were  full  of  shipwrecks  and 
of  dead  bodies  all  swelled,  and  as  the  dead  bodies  were 
inflamed  by  the  sun  they  putrefied  and  corrupted  the  air, 
insomuch  that  the  misery  was  not  only  an  object  of  com- 
miseration to  the  Jews,  but  to  those  that  hated  them  and 
had  been  the  authors  of  that  misery  .  .  .  and  the 
number  of  the  slain  was  six  thousand  five  hundred."^ 
Considering,  however,  that  in  no  age  of  the  Church  has 
there  been  any  accepted  identification  of  the  scenes  thus 
pictured,  it  must  always  remain  uncertain  whether  the 
seer  meant  to  point  to  any  very  definite  events.  His 
object  may  have  been  to  express  in  imaginative  emblems 
broad  general  circumstances  and  conditions  of  warning 
and  judgment. 

1  Wisdom  xi.  6,  7.         2  jog.  B.  J.  iii.  9,  §  3.  ^  jog.  b.  J.  iii.  10,  §  9. 


264  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

iii.  The  third  Angel  sounded,  and  a  great  star  called 
Absinth  "fell  upon  the  third  part  of  the  world's  waters, 
and  made  them  so  bitter  that  men  died  of  them."  Here 
again  we  are  in  the  abstract  region  of  apocalyptical 
imagination  tinged  by  reminiscences  of  the  Plagues  of 
Egypt.  Alike  the  result  and  the  agency  by  which  it 
is  accomplished  are  indefinite.  As  stars  are  the  images 
of  rulers,  and  fallen  stars  of  rulers  flung  down  from 
heaven,^  the  symbol  may  dimly  express  the  bitterness 
and  terror  caused  by  the  overthrow  of  Nero  and  the 
ominous  failure  of  the  Julian  line.  The  details  of  the 
image  may  have  been  suggested  by  the  wicked  habit  of 
poisoning  the  waters  of  which  an  enemy  was  to  drink. 
The  Romans  excused  their  cruelty  at  Jerusalem  by 
asserting  that  the  springs  and  fountains  had  been 
poisoned  by  the  Jews.^ 

iv.  The  fourth  Angel  sounded,  and  the  third  part  of 
the  sun  and  moon  and  stars,  and  day  and  night  are 
smitten  ;^  in  other  words — in  accordance  with  the  recog- 
nised imagery  of  Apocalypse  and  Prophecy — ruler  after 
ruler,  chieftain  after  chieftain  of  the  Roman  Empire  and 
the  Jewish  nation  was  assassinated  and  ruined.  Gains, 
Claudius,  Nero,  Galba,  Otho,  Vitellius,  all  died  by  murder 
or  suicide  ;  Herod  the  Great,  Herod  Antipas,  Herod 
Agrippa,  and  most  of  the  Herodian  Princes,  together 
with  not  a  few  of  the  leading  High  Priests  of  Jerusalem, 

^  "  How  art  thou  fallen  from  lioaven,  oil  Lucifer,  Sou  of  the  Mormng  ! " 
(Is.  xiv.  12). 

*  As  a  specimen  of  the  strange  diversities  of  interpreters,  I  may 
mention  that  Bede  understands  the  fallen  star  of  heretics  generally; 
N.  de  Lyra  applies  it  to  Arius  and  Macedouius ;  Luther  thinks  that  it 

represents Origen  !     Mede  understands  it   of  Romulus  Augustulus ; 

Grotius  of  "  that  Egyptian  " ;  Herder  of  the  Zealot  Eloazar ;  others  of 
Gregory  the  Great  I 

3  Matt.  xxiv.  29. 


THE   FIFTH   TRUMPET.  265 

perished  in  disgrace,  or  in  exile,  or  by  violent  hands.  All 
these  were  quenched  suns  and  darkened  stars.  It  must 
be  again  borne  in  mind  that  all  the  events  thus  sym- 
bolised are  not  meant  to  be  consecutive.  Although  pro- 
gressive, they  are  analogous  to,  or  even  identical  with, 
those  already  described.  The  plagues  of  the  trumpets  are 
but  the  deadlier  form  of  the  plagues  indicated  by  the 
seals  ;  and  in  the  vials  the  same  woes  reach  their  consum- 
mation. So  far,  therefore,  as  the  effects  of  the  fourth 
Trumpet  are  meant  to  be  historical,  and  not  a  general 
echo  of  our  Lord's  great  discourse  about  the  Last 
Things,  they  allude,  like  those  of  the  sixth  Seal,  to 
political  perils  and  revolutions  in  the  Eoman  Empire, 
which  were  the  special  characteristic  of  that  epoch,  and 
of  which  every  comet  and  every  eclipse  and  every 
unusual  tempest  was  believed  to  be  a  threatening  sign.^ 

V.  The  trumpets  are  broken  into  divisions  of  four  and 
three.  To  prepare  for  the  remaining  three,  a  single 
eagle^  flies  in  the  mid  region  of  Heaven,  screaming  with 
loud  cry  a  triple  "  Woe  !  "  by  reason  of  the  Angel  trum- 
pets which  were  yet  to  sound.  The  eagle  denotes 
carnage; — "where  the  slain  are  there  is  she."^  The 
massacres  of  these  years  stained,  as  we  have  seen,  both 
the  land  and  sea.  The  furrows  of  earth  were  red  with 
slaughter ;  the  waves  were  dyed  with  blood. 

The  tifth  Angel  sounds,  and  a  star  falls  to  earth,  to 
whom  is  given  the  key  of  the  abyss.     He  opens  the 

1  Stars  are  the  well -understood  Scripture  symbol  for  persons  in 
authority  (Gen.  xxxvii.  9  ;  Jer.  iv.  23 ;  Ezek.  xxxii.  7,  8  ;  Isa.  xiii.  9,  10, 
17).     The  symbol  is  a  natural  one.     Similarly,  Shakspere  tells  us  how — 

"  Certain  stars  shot  madly  from  their  spheres 
To  hear  the  sea-maid's  music." 

2  Rev.  viii.  13.     kvls  aeroD,  «,  A,  B,  &c. 
^  Hos.  viii.  1. 


266  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

abyss,  and  in  the  issuing  smoke  wliicli  dims  the  air 
comes  forth  a  host  of  scorpion-locusts,  which  are  for- 
bidden to  hurt  the  grass  or  green  things  or  trees,  but 
are  bidden,  for  a  space  of  five  months,  to  torment  with- 
out kilUng  all  who  have  not  the  seal  of  God  on  their 
forehead.  These  scorpion -locusts  resemble  war-horses, 
with  crowns  like  gold,  with  the  face  of  men,  the  hair  of 
women,  the  teeth  of  lions  ;  they  have  breastplates  as  of 
iron,  and  the  sound  of  their  wings  is  like  the  sound  of 
chariots,  or  of  horses  charging  to  battle.  The  anguish 
they  inflict  makes  men  desire  to  die  ;  ^  and  their  king  is 
called  Abaddon,  Apollyon,  or  the  Destroyer. 

The  fallen  star  may  again  be  meant  for  Nero  ;  but 
on  the  whole  I  agree  with  those  who  see  in  this  vision 
a  purely  demoniac  host.  The  fallen  star  will  then  be 
Satan,  of  whom  the  Lord  said,  "  I  saw  Satan  as  light- 
ning fallen  from  heaven."  ^  The  abyss  is  pre-eminently 
the  abode  of  "  demons."^  It  is  their  speciality  to  cause 
torment.*  They  are  as  appropriately  symbolised  by  scor- 
pion-locusts as  by  frogs. ^  Christ  had  specially  prophe- 
sied that  "  this  wicked  generation "  should  be  more 
grievously  afflicted  by  demons.  As  time  went  on,  Eome 
and  Jerusalem — the  two  places  typically  prominent  in 
the  mind  of  the  writer — were  becoming  more  and  more 
"  a  habitation  of  demons,  a  hold  of  every  unclean  spirit, 
a  cage  of  every  unclean  and  hateful  bird."  ^     In  Rome 

•  Jer.  iii.  8  :  "  Death  shall  be  chosen  rather  thau  life,  by  all  them  that 
remain  of  this  evil  family." 

2  Luke  X.  18.  The  Book  of  Enoch  is  full  of  good  and  evil  angels, 
who  are  spoken  of  as  stars  (Enoch  xviii.  13 ;  xxi.  3,  &e.). 

3  Luke  viii.  31.  "  Matt.  xv.  22. 

^  Rev.  xvi.  13.  Renan  may  be  right  in  saying  that  the  notion  of  frogs 
and  locusts  coming  from  the  abyss,  may  have  been  partly  suggested  by  tho 
actual  j)henomena  of  the  Solfatara,  or  some  similar  district. 

•^  Rev.  xviii.  2. 


THE   DEMON-HOST.  267 

the  loose,  disbanded  soldiery  and  the  scum  of  the  forum 
had  degraded  society  to  the  lowest  levels  of  infamy. 
The  city  had  become  a  foul  pool,  into  which  every 
polluted  river  had  poured  its  dregs.  In  Jerusalem, 
according  to  the  emphatic  testimony  of  Josephus,  never 
since  the  beginning  of  the  world  had  there  been  any 
generation  more  prolific  of  wickedness.  Stier  says, 
"  that  in  the  period  between  the  Resurrection  and  the 
Fall  of  Jerusalem  the  Jewish  nation  acted  as  if  jyos- 
sessed  hy  seven  thousand  demons.  The  whole  age  had 
upon  it  a  stamp  of  the  infernal."  ^ 

Whether  in  this  general  picture  of  the  host  of  hell 
swarming  out  of  the  abyss,  there  is  any  direct  allusion 
to  the  Idumeans,  Zealots,  and  Sicarii  stinging  themselves 
to  death  with  untold  anguish,  like  scorpions  encircled 
by  a  ring  of  fire  ; — or,  again,  to  the  tumults,  bloodshed, 
and  agonies  of  Rome,  the  frequency  of  suicide,  and  the 
many  tales  of  those  who  seemed  to  long  for  death  in 
vain  —  cannot  be  affirmed.  The  description  of  the 
scorpion-locusts  evidently  recalls  the  Egyptian  Plague, 
and  the  language  of  Joel,  and  the  fanciful  allusions  to 
locusts  which  abound  in  the  songs  and  proverbs  of  the 
East.^  The  five  months  may  point  to  the  summer 
period,  vrhich  is  the  time  of  locust  plagues.^     But  two 

^  Reden  Jesu,  ii.  187. 

3  Locusts  are  called  "  cavaletti  "  in  Naples.  Hermas  {Vis.  iv.  1)  sees 
"  a  great  beast  ....  and  fiery  locusts  coming  out  of  his  mouth,"  which 
appears  to  be  {Vis.  iv.  3)  "the  type  of  the  great  tribulation  which  is  to 
come."     Compare  Claudian's  desci'iption — 

"  Horret  apex  capitis ;  medio  fera  lumina  surguut 
Vertice  ;  cognatus  dorso  durescit  amictus. 
Armavit  natura  cutem  dumique  rubeutes 
Cuspidibus  parvis  multos  acuere  rubores." — {Epigr.  xxxiii.) 

3  Bochart,  Hierozoic.  ii.  495 ;  Plin.  IT.  N.  ix.  50  :  "  latent  quints  men- 
eibus."     If  any  one  desires  to  see  once  more  the  endless  guesses  of  inter- 


268  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIAXITY. 

circumstances  seem  to  show  that  we  are  here  dealiug 
not  with  human  avengers  but  with  invisible  demons 
of  the  air.  One  is  that  tlieir  leader  is  the  Demon 
Destroyer  ;  the  other  is  that  Christians,  and  Christians 
only,  are  expressly  exempted  from  their  power  to  hurt. 

vi.  Two  woes  yet  remain.  A  voice  is  heard  from  the 
iiorns  of  the  golden  altar,  bidding  the  sixth  Angel  loose 
the  four  Angels  which  are  bound  at  the  great  river 
Euphrates,^  who  were  prepared  for  the  due  time,  to  slay 
the  third  part  of  men.  Immediately  there  ride  forth 
Uvo  Iiundred  millioti  horsemen,  breathing  fire  and  smoke, 
on  lion-headed  steeds,  armed  with  breastplates  as  of  fire, 
jacinth,  and  brimstone.  With  their  flames  and  their 
amphisbsena-stings  they  slay  the  third  part  of  men  ; — 
and  yet  the  rest  do  not  repent.^ 

It  is  probable  that  the  facts  which  loom  large  and 
lurid  through  this  blood-red  mist  of  Apocalyptic  sym- 
bols are  the  swarms  of  Orientals  who  gathered  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  the  train  of  Titus,^  and  the 
overwhelming  Parthian  host    which   was    expected   to 

prctors.  I  may  mentiou  that  Bede  explains  the  "  five  mouths  "  of  human 
life,  because  we  have  five  senses ;  the  scorpions  are  heretics.  Vitringa 
makes  the  five  months  mean  150  years — the  time  of  Gothic  domination. 
Calovius  explains  them  of  the  prevalence  of  Arianism.  Beugel  makes 
them  mean  79^  years — the  time  of  the  Jewish  afflictions  in  Persia  in  the 
sixth  century.  Hofraann  refers  to  the  five  sins ;  and  Ziillig  to  the  time 
of  the  Deluge  (Gen.  vii.  24).  Some  consider  that  Apollyon  meant 
Napoleon.  BuUinger  explains  the  locusts  of  the  monks ;  Bellarmine  of 
tlie  Protestants  ;  and  so  on.     And  this  is  "  Exegesis  f" 

'  These  four  bound  angels  have  never  been  explained.  Some  refer 
tlieni  to  tlie  Angel  princes  of  the  Assyrians,  Babylonians,  Medes,  and 
Persians.  Some  to  the  four  Roman  stations  on  the  Euphrates.  Bound 
uugels  would  recall  to  St.  John's  readers  the  notion  of  evil  spirits.  Comp. 
Tobit  viii.  3 ;  Matt.  xii.  43—45. 

-  Et  gravis  in  geminum  surgens  caput  amphisbgena "  (Luc.  I'hars. 
ix.  719). 

•'  Jos.  B.  J.   iii.   1,   §  3 ;  4,   §   2.      Four    kings— Antiochus,  Sohenms. 


HOSTS   OF   HORSEMEN.  -JGO 

avenge  the  ruin  of  Nero.  It  was  a  popular  belief  that 
he  was  still  living ;  that  he  had  taken  refuge  in  the 
East ;  or  that  in  any  case  Tiridates,  who  greatly  admired 
him,  or  Vologeses,  whose  relations  with  him  were  very 
amicable,  would  bring  him  back  with  a  whirlwind  of 
triumphant  horsemen.^  These  great  Eastern  Empires 
took  deep  and  dangerous  interest  in  the  affairs  of  Rome. 
"  Vologeses,  King  of  the  Parthians,"  says  Suetonius, 
"  had  sent  ambassadors  to  the  Senate  about  the  renewal 
of  amity,  and  earnestly  made  this  further  request,  that 
the  memory  of  Nero  should  be  held  in  honour.  In  my 
youth,  twenty  years  after,  when  a  false  Nero  had  arisen, 
his  name  was  so  popular  among  the  Parthians  that 
he  was  strenuously  assisted  and  with  difficulty  given 
up."  "  Both  Suetonius  and  Tacitus  relate  that  Vologeses 
offered  to  assist  Vespasian  with  forty  thousand  mounted 
archers.^  One  of  the  circumstances  which  most  deeply 
aroused  the  indignation  of  Titus  against  the  Jews  was 
that  they  had  sent  embassies  for  assistance  to  their  kins- 
men beyond  the  Euphrates.*  In  the  Sibylline  Oracles 
and  in  the  Ascension  of  Isaiah  we  find  distinct  and 
repeated  allusion  to  some  expected  catastrophe  from  the 
realm  of  Parthia.^     The  metaphor  will  then  closely  re- 

Agrippa,  and  Malchus — contributed  arcliers  and  horsemen.  The  latter, 
who  was  an  Arabian  Prince,  sent  5,000  archers  and  1,000  cavalry. 

1  See  Suet.  'Rero,  13,  30,  47,  57 ;  Garm.  Sib.  iv.  119—147 ;  v.  93,  and 
passim  ;  viii.  70,  &c. 

2  Comp.  Tac.  H.  i.  2. 

3  Tac.  H.  iv.  51 ;  Suet.  Vesp.  6. 
*  Jos.  B.  J.  vi.  6,  §  2. 

"  "Towards  evening  war  will  arise,  and  the  great  fugitive  of  Rome 
(Nero)  will  raise  the  sword,  and  with  many  m,yriads  ofvien  ride  through 
the  Euphrates"  [Garm.  Sib.  iv.  116,  seq.).  In  the  fifth  book  of  Sibylline 
verses  Nero  is  called  "  the  dread  serpent,"  who  though  vanished  would 
return,  and  give  himself  out  as  God  {Id.  v.  93,  and  passim).  Nero  is  the 
"  godless  king,"  and  murderer  of  his  mother,  of  the  Vision  of  Isaiah. 


270  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

semble  that  of  Jer.  li.  .27,  "  Cause  the  horses  to  come 
up  as  rough  caterpillars ;  prepare  against  her  the  nations 
with  the  Kings  of  the  Medes."  These  vaticinations  do 
not  belong  in  the  least  to  the  essence  or  heart  of  the 
Apocalypse.  They  are  but  passing  illustrations  of  the 
great  principles — the  hopes  and  warnings — which  it  was 
meant  to  inculcate.  Warriors  from  the  Euphrates  had 
their  share  in  the  siege  of  Jerusalem ;  and  though 
Parthian  horsemen  did  not  sweep  down  from  the  East 
at  that  time  against  pagan  Rome,  yet  in  due  time 
vengeance  did  fall  on  her,  and  in  due  time  the  count- 
less hosts  which  swarmed  from  beyond  the  Euphrates 
may  well  be  said  to  have  destroyed  a  third  of  men,  and 
yet  to  have  left  the  rest  impenitent  for  their  crimes. 

SECTION    lY. 

AN    EPISODE. 

Then  follows  another  pause. 

A  mighty  Angel  arrayed  with  cloud,  and  with  a 
rainbow  encircling  a  sunlike  face,  descends  from 
Heaven.  His  feet  are  like  pillars  of  fire,  and  he 
sets  one  on  the  land  and  one  on  the  sea.^  A  little 
open  book  is  in  his  hand,  and  when  he  speaks  in  his 
lion-voice  seven  thunders  utter  their  voices.  But  the 
seer  is  forbidden  to  write,  and  it  is,  therefore,  absurd 

who  shall  bo  destroyed  after  1,335  days.  Jerome,  on  Dau.  i.  28,  says 
that  many  Christians  expected  the  return  of  Nero  as  Antichrist. 

^  Since,  in  xi.  3,  he  says,  "  I  will  give  power  to  ray  witnesses,"  we  may 
perhaps  see  in  this  mighty  Angel  a  representation  of  the  Son  of  God. 
The  descriptions  correspond  witli  those  of  the  first  (i.  15)  and  fourth 
Angel  (iv.  3) ;  see  too  Dan.  xii.  1.  Nic.  do  Lyra  supposes  that  the  Angel 
is  meant  for  the  Emperor  Justinian ;  Luther,  for  tlie  Pope ;  and  Bede, 
for  St.  John  himself!  But  it  is  worse  than  useless  to  record  the  vagaries 
of  Apocalyptic  interpretation. 


THE   SEVEN   THUNDERS.  271 

to  conjecture  what  tliey  uttered.  Then  the  Angel,  lift- 
ing his  right  hand  to  Heaven,  swears  by  the  Almighty 
Creator  that  no  further  time  shall  intervene,  but  that, 
at  the  trumpet-blast  of  the  seventh  Angel,  the  mystery 
of  God  shall  be  finished.^  The  seer  is  bidden  to  take 
the  book  and  eat  it.  In  his  mouth  it  is  sweet  as  honey; 
in  his  belly  it  is  bitter.  He  is  then  bidden  to  prophesy 
again  concerning  many  peoples,  nations,  tongues,  and 
kings. 

This  magnificent  episode  tends  to  deepen  and 
heighten  the  expectation  of  what  the  seventh  Trumpet 
is  to  bring.  The  incident  of  eating  the  roll  is  also  found 
in  Ezek.  ii.  9 ;  iii.  3,^  and  the  command  to  seal  up  the 
"  utterance "  of  the  seven  thunders  resembles  those 
given  to  Daniel,  in  Dan.  viii.  26 ;  xii.  4 — 9.  The 
general  meaning  seems  to  be  that  much  of  the  future  is 
to  be  left  in  deep  mystery,  and  that  the  messages  yet  to 
be  delivered  are  of  mingled  import,  sweet  with  consola- 
tions, yet  bitter  with  awful  judgments.  The  little  book 
is  intended  to  contain  the  issues  of  the  seventh  Trumpet. 
They  are  as  yet  undeveloped.  Much  of  the  vision  hitherto 
has  referred  to  the  past.  It  has  explained  the  meaning 
of  the  signs  in  the  physical  and  political  world  which 
pointed  to  the  Coming  Judgment.  It  has  made  clear 
to  believers  that  the  woes  which  had  shaken  and  were 
still  shaking  the  earth  were  the  beginning  of  the  Palin- 
genesia.  What  the  seer  has  now  to  foreshadow  is  the 
Coming  Dawn  itself. 

^  This  is  a  reference  to  vi.  11,  wliere  the  souls  of  the  martyrs  are 
bidden  to  rest,  "  still  a  little  time." 

^  Comp.  Jer.  xv.  16,  "  Thy  words  were  found,  and  I  did  eat  them." 
The  contents  of  the  roll  were  sweet  in  anticipation,  because  ho  had  hoped 
to  read  in  them  the  perfect  conversion  of  Jerusalem ;  but  were  bitter 
when  their  real  import  was  known. 


272  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

His  first  warning  prophecies  are  addressed  to  the 
Jews.  The  judgments  of  the  first  six  Seals  affect  the 
fourth  part  of  all  men  alike — Christians,  Jews,  heathens. 
Before  the  opening  of  the  seventh  Seal,  the  servants  of 
God — that  is,  all  the  members  of  the  Christian  Church — 
are  sealed  upon  their  foreheads.  The  judgments  of  the 
first  six  Trumpets  affect,  therefore,  only  the  Jews  and  the 
heathens.  But  now,  before  the  actual  sounding  of  the 
seventh  Trumpet,  the  Jews  are  won  to  Grod  (xi.  13). 
St.  John,  like  St.  Paul,  sees  that  it  is  only  "in  part" 
that  "  blindness  hath  befallen  Israel,"  and  only  "  until 
the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in."  Consequently, 
the  judgments  of  the  first  six  Vials,  though  they  extend 
over  the  whole  earth,  fall  only  upon  the  heathen.  The 
seventh  Vial  brings  upon  all  the  unconverted  the  final 
judgment. 

So  that  before  the  seventh  Trumpet  sounds  the  seer 
is  bidden  to  measure  the  Temple,  and  altar,  and  wor- 
shippers with  a  measuring  reed,^  exclusively  of  the  coui't 
which  has  been  given  over  to  the  Gentiles,  who  are  to 
trample  down  the  Holy  City  for  forty-two  months — 
i.e.,  three  and  a  half  years. ^  During  these  twelve  hun- 
dred and  sixty  days,  the  Two  Witnesses  are  to  prophesy 
in  sackcloth.  They  resemble  the  two  olive  trees  and  the 
two  lamp-stands  of  the  Temple.^     With  fire  from  their 

1  Ezek.  xl. ;  Zecli.  iv. 

2  Dan.  \\\\.  13  ;  1  Mace.  iii.  45,  51 ;  iv.  60;  Luke  xxi.  24.  "Jerusalem 
sliall  he  trodden  down  of  the  Gentiles,  until  the  times  of  tlie  Gentiles  he 
fulfilled."  The  period  3j  years,  42  months,  or  1,2G0  days  (the  half  of 
seven  years),  is  often  found  in  Scripture  in  connexion  with  judgments. 
Dan.  vii.  25  ( Antiochus  Epiphanes  rages  for  "  a  time,  times,  and  half  a 
time");  ix.  27  (the  oblation  ceases  for  half  a  week);  xii.  7,  11; 
oomp.  Luke  xxi.  24;  James  v.  17  (time  of  droiight  at  Elijah's 
prayer). 

^  Zech.  iv.  3,  11. 


THE  WITNESSES.  273 

mouth  tliey  can  destroy  their  enemies.^  They  can  shut 
up  the  Heavens  and  smite  the  earth  with  plague. 
When  their  testimony  is  over,  the  Wild  Beast  out  of  the 
abyss  shall  kill  them.  Their  dead  bodies  shall  lie  for 
three  and  a  half  days  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem,  the 
spiritual  Sodom  ^  and  Egypt,  where  their  Lord  was 
crucified.  Men  of  all  nations  shall  rejoice  over  their 
corpses,^  and  will  not  suffer  them  to  be  buried.*  Then 
the  breath  of  life  from  God  shall  enter  into  them.  To 
the  terror  of  all  they  shall  stand  upon  their  feet,^  and  at 
the  bidding  of  a  voice  from  Heaven  shall  ascend  in  cloud. 
Then  a  great  earthquake,  in  which  seven  thousand  shall 
perish,  shall  shake  down  a  tenth  of  the  city.  The  rest 
of  its  inhabitants  repent  in  their  terror,  and  give  glory 
to  the  God  of  Heaven. 

Every  item  of  the  symbolism,  as  will  have  been  seen 
from  the  references,  is  borrowed  from  ancient  prophecy  : 
and  yet  neither  in  its  details  nor  in  its  general  import  is 
the  vision  clear.  There  neither  is  nor  ever  has  been  in 
Christendom,  in  any  age,  or  among  any  school  of 
interpreters,  the  smallest  agreement,  or  even  approach 
to  an  agreement,  as  to  the  events  which  the  seer  had  in 
view. 

What  is  the  object  of  the  measuring  ?  Judging  from 
Ezekiel  and  Zechariah,  we  should  say  that  it  is  for  con- 
struction and  preservation  ;  but  in  other  passages  the 

1  2  Kings  i.  10 ;  Jer.  v.  14;  Ecclus.  xlviii.  1.  "  Then  stood  up  Elias 
the  Prophet  as  fire,  and  his  word  burned  like  a  lamj).'" 

2  Jerusalem  (Sodom);  Isa.  i.  10;  iii.  9;  Jer.  xxiii.  14;  Ezek.  xvi.  48, 
49.  There  may  be  a  passing  allusion  to  the  detestable  crimes  of  the 
Zealots,  as  recorded  by  Josephus,  B.  J.  iv.  6,  §  3. 

^  Congratulations  of  the  enemies  of  God.  Heb.  viii.  10,  12 ;  Esth.  ix. 
19,  22. 

•*  1  Kings  xiii.  22;  Isa.  xiv.  18;  Tobit  i.  17. 
•^  Ezek.  xxxvii.  10. 


274  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

"  stretching  out  of  a  line,"  or  "  setting  a  plumbline,"  or 
"  measuring  with  a  line,"  are  emblems  of  punishment 
or  destruction.^  As  both  destruction  and  preservation 
follow,  the  question  is  not  easy  to  answer. 

Again,  is  the  seer  now  dealing  with  more  or  less 
definite  history,  whether  contemporary  or  impending,  or 
are  the  limits  of  past,  present,  and  future  obliterated  in 
illustrating  the  Divine  principles  of  the  Eternal  Now  ? 

Again,  does  the  vision  refer  to  the  actual  Jerusalem, 
or  to  Jerusalem  as  an  emblem  of  the  whole  Jewish  race  ? 

Once  more,  who  are  the  Two  Witnesses  ?  Were 
there  during  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  or  during  the 
general  epoch  of  its  imminent  doom,  two  witnesses  for 
God  and  for  Christ,  who  in  their  characteristics  recalled 
Moses  and  Elijah?  Or  are  Moses  and  Elijah  themselves 
symbolically  described?  Was  the  seer  thinking  of  St. 
John  the  Baptist  and  our  Lord  ?  ^  or  of  the  tw^o  Christian 
martyrs,  James  the  son  of  Zebedee  and  James  the  Bishop 
of  Jeru«;alem?  or  of  two  Christian  witnesses  of  whom  no 
history  is  recorded?^  or  of  the  murder  of  men  like  Zecha- 
riah,  son  of  Berachiah  ?  or  is  he  indeed  only  thinking  of 
Enoch  and  Elijah,*  according  to  the  almost  unanimous 
tradition  of  the  early  Church  ?^  Or,  again,  widening  the 
symbol  of  Jerusalem  to  apply  to  the  whole  Jewish  and 

^  Lam.  ii.  7,  8 ;  Isa.  xxxiv.  11 ;  Amos  vii.  6,  9  ;  2  Sam.  viii.  2  ;  2  Kings 
xxi.  12,  13. 

"  Matt.  xvii.  9—13.  3  Compare  Rev.  xi.  3  with  Acts  i.  8. 

*  In  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  Enoeli  says  of  himself  and  Elijah, 
*'  We  are  to  live  until  the  end  o£  the  world  ;  and  t]ie7i  tee  are  to  be  sent 
by  God  to  resist  Antichrist,  and  to  be  slain  by  him,  and  after  three  days 
to  rise  again,  and  to  be  caught  up  in  clouds  to  meet  the  Lord"  (Gosp. 
Nicod.  ii.  9). 

''  As  preserved  in  the  Commentary  of  Andreas,  Bp.  of  Csesarea  in 
Cappadocia  (comp.  Gospel  of  Nicodemus  xxv.).  Tlie  \'iew  derives  some 
sanction  from  Luke  xvi.  31 ;  and  the  Transfiguration,  Matt.  xvii.  3. 


THE  TWO  WITNESSES.  275 

Christian  Church,  is  he  thinking  of  St.  James  and  St. 
Peter  ?  or  even  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  as  the  two  most 
illustrious  victims  of  the  Neronian  persecution  ?  None 
of  these  guesses  are  certain  ;  and  perhaps  the  same  may- 
be said  of  a  solution  which  has  sometimes  occurred  to  me, 
that  the  Two  Witnesses  represent  Jewish  and  Gentile 
converts  to  the  Church.  Is  the  description  of  their 
unburied  corpses  and  subsequent  ascension  a  symbol  of 
the  true  fulfilment  of  their  prophecies,  the  vindication 
of  the  truths  they  taught,  the  posthumous  honours  paid 
to  their  memories?  Are  we  to  understand  the  visioi> 
literally,  or  ideally,  or  allegorically  ?  None  can  tell  us ; 
and  who  shall  say  ? 

Lastly,  in  the  earthquake  and  the  overthrow  of  a 
tenth  part  of  the  city,  and  the  resultant  terror  and  repen- 
tance, are  we  to  see  a  picture  of  the  anticipated  results 
from  the  rapidly  approaching  siege  of  Jerusalem,  or  do 
they  shadow  forth  the  fate  of  the  besieged,  and  the  effect 
of  their  awful  judgment  upon  the  minds  of  their  co- 
religionists throughout  the  world  ?  ^ 

These  questions  have  never  been  satisfactorily 
answered,  and  perhaps  never  will  be.  We  must  be 
content  to  leave  them  in  the  half-light  in  which  the 
uncertainty  of  nineteen  Christian  centuries  has  left 
them  hitherto.  There  are  no  two  writers  of  any 
importance  wlio  even  approximately  agree  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  symbols.  Those  symbols  were 
probably  coloured  not  only  by  the  language  of  the 
Old  Testament,  but  by  actual  events  in  the  siege. 
Such,  for  instance,  was  the  terrific  storm,  the  bursts  of 
rain,  the  earthquake,   "the    amazing   concussions    and 

'  Doubtless  the  imagery  is  coloured  by  reminiscences  of  the  events 
mentioned  in  Matt,  xxvii.  51 ;  xxviii.  2. 

s  2 


276  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

bellowings  of  tlie  earth,"  during  wliicli  the  Idumeans 
were  admitted,  and  in  which  Josephus  says  that  "  the 
whole  system  of  the  universe  seemed  to  be  in  disorder."  ^ 
In  the  subsequent  massacres,  the  outer  Temple — that  is, 
the  Court  of  the  Gentiles — "  was  all  overflowed  with 
blood,"  and  eight  thousand  five  hundred  corpses  lay 
about  its  precincts.  The  insults  to  the  unburied  wit- 
nesses recall  for  a  moment  the  fate  of  the  younger  Hanan 
and  the  priest  Jesus,  whose  bodies  were  "  cast  out  naked 
and  unburied  to  be  the  food  of  dogs  and  wild  beasts," 
but  whose  reputation  was  so  thoroughly  vindicated  in 
the  eyes  of  their  countrymen,  that  Josephus  pronounces 
a  high  eulogy  upon  them,  and  attributes  the  final  doom  ot 
the  city  to  the  guilt  incurred  by  their  murderers."  The 
three  and  a  half  years,  again,  correspond  with  the  actual 
length  of  the  siege,  together  with  the  special  horrors  by 
which  it  was  preluded.  On  the  other  hand,  we  know 
of  nothing  which  corresponds  to  the  fall  of  only  the 
tenth  part  of  the  city,  or  to  any  repentance  on  the  part 
of  its  inhabitants.  Every  interpretation  seems  to  be 
beset  with  insuperable  difficulties.  No  one  school  of 
commentators  has  been  more  successful  than  its  rivals 
in  furnishing  an  historical  solution.  May  not  this 
be  a  sign  that  no  exact  historical  counterpart  to  these 
symbols  was  contemplated  by  the  seer,  and  that  he  is 
only  moving  in  the  region  of  ideal  anticipation  in  order 
to  use  material  symbols  as  the  vehicle  for  eternal 
principles  ?  He  who  has  learnt  the  lesson,  "  not  by 
power  nor  by  might,  but  by  my  Spirit,  saith  the  Lord 
of  Hosts ;  "  he  who  feels  that  the  downfall  of  Evil 
and  the  ultimate  triumph  of  Good  has  all  the  certainty 
of  an  inevitable  law ; — he  who  is  waiting  for  the  con- 

'  Jos.  B.  J.  iv.  5,  §  5.  2  jii^  iy  5^  §  2 


THE  FATE  OF  JERUSALEM.  277 

solation  of  the  spiritual  Israel  and  the  gathering  of 
all  nations  into  one  flock  under  one  shepherd  at  the 
Coming  of  the  Lord, — he,  it  may  he,  has  learnt  more  of 
the  inner  spirit  and  essential  meaning  of  the  Apocalypse 
than  if  he  followed  all  the  flickering  lights  of  Exegesis 
which  have  led  men  into  the  marshes  of  rival  fictions 
from  the  days  of  St.  Victorinus  down  to  the  present 
time. 

It  has  heen  often  asserted  that  St.  John  meant  to 
indicate  the  preservation  of  the  Temple,  in  accordance 
with  the  general  expectation  and  what  was  believed  to 
be  the  express  wish  of  Titus.  But  he  does  not  say  so. 
The  measuring-rod  may  have  been,  as  we  have  seen, 
a  mark  of  coming  overthrow.  There  is  indeed  an 
absolutely  fatal  argument  against  the  notion  that 
St.  John  anticipated  that  the  Temple  would  be  pre- 
served. It  is  that  our  Lord  on  Olivet,  in  the  very 
discourse  on  which  the  Apocalypse  is  an  expanded 
and  symbolic  commentary,  had  declared  without  the 
least  ambiguity,  and  in  exact  accordance  with  the 
result,  that  of  that  Temple  not  one  stone  should  be 
left  upon  another.  St.  John  indicates  the  conversion  of 
the  Jews,  not  the  deliverance  of  Jerusalem. 

But  all  that  we  cannot  understand  of  St.  John's 
symbolism  belongs — the  very  failure  of  the  Christian 
world  in  any  age  to  understand  it  is  a  sufficient  proof 
that  it  belongs — to  the  secondary,  the  subordinate, 
the  less  essential  elements  of  the  book.  It  must  always 
be  more  than  doubtful  whether,  in  the  very  small  frac- 
tion of  the  book  which  touches  on  the  yet  earthly  and 
historic  future,  St.  John  intended  to  deal  with  specific 
vaticinations.  At  any  rate,  the  meaning  and  literal 
accomplishment   of    such    vaticinations    is    irrevocably 


278  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

lost  for  us,  and,  in  point  of  fact,  has  never  been  known 
to  any  age  of"  the  Church — not  even  to  the  earliest, 
not  even — so  far  as  our  records  go — to  lrena3us,  the 
hearer  of  Polycarp,  or  to  Polycarp,  the  hearer  of  St. 
John.  What  we  can  see  in  the  whole  vision  of  the 
Holy  City  and  the  Two  Witnesses,  is  a  prophecy  of 
the  ultimate  conversion  of  the  vast  mass  of  Israel,  and 
the  final  triumph  of  Christian  testimony  over  every 
opposing  force ;  further  than  this,  there  is  nothing  to 
be  found  in  any  commentary  but  fancy  and  guess- 
work, and  arbitrary  combinations,  which  may  seem 
irrefragable  to  those  who  indulge  in  them,  but  which 
have  not  succeeded  in  convincing  a  handful  of  readers. 

Then,  at  last,  the  seventh  Angel  sounds.  There  is 
a  shout  of  jubilee  in  Heaven,  because  the  kingdoms  of 
the  world  have  become  the  kingdom  of  our  Lord  and 
of  His  Christ.  The  Jews  are  now  converted.  There 
remains  nothing  but  the  judgment  of  the  Gentiles  and 
the  Coming  of  Christ  in  the  close  of  the  a3on.  The 
earthly  Temple  has  at  last  disappeared.  In  the  Heaven 
is  seen  the  Temple  of  God,  open  even  to  the  Holiest 
Place,  to  which  there  may  now  be  universal  access  at 
all  times,  through  the  blood  of  Christ. 

SECTION    V. 

THE    WILD    BEAST    FROM    THE    SEA. 

But,  as  though  to  compensate  for  the  uncertain 
idealism  of  the  last  Vision,  the  meaning  of  the  next 
Vision  is  retrospective,  and,  in  its  main  outlines,  per- 
fectly clear. 

A    woman,    arrayed   with   the    sun,    with  the  moon 
beneath  her  feet,  and  a   crown  of  twelve  stars  around 


THE   WOMAN  AND   THE   DRAGON.  279 

her  head,  brings  forth  a  man-child.  A  huge  scarlet 
dragon,  with  ten  horns  and  seven  diademed  heads, 
whose  tail  sweeps  after  it  the  third  part  of  the  stars 
to  the  earth/  stands  before  her  to  devour  the  child  the 
moment  it  is  born,  since  the  child  is  to  rule  the  nations 
with  a  rod  of  iron.  But  the  child  is  snatched  up  to 
the  throne  of  God,  and  the  woman  flies  into  the  wilder- 
ness, where  she  is  to  be  nourished  for  1,2G0  days. 

All  agree  as  to  the  interpretation.  The  star-crowned 
woman  is  the  ideal  Church  of  Israel.^  The  child  she 
brings  forth  is  a  symbol,  partly  of  the  Messiah,  partly  of 
the  Christian  Church.^  The  scarlet  dragon  is  an  emblem 
of  Satan,  with  the  attributes  of  the  world-power,  as 
specially  represented  by  the  Roman  Empire — of  which 
a  dragon  was  one  of  the  later  insignia.  A  dragon 
or  serpent  (for  between  the  two  words  there  is  no  real 
distinction)  was  also  the  apt  inspirer  for  an  Emperor  who 
was  believed  to  wear  as  an  amulet  a  serpent's  skin,  and 
whose  life,  according  to  popular  legend,  had  been  saved 
by  a  serpent  when  he  was  an  infant  in  the  cradle."^  Its 
seven  heads  and  ten  horns  are  seven  Emperors'  and  ten 
Provincial  Governors.  But  no  power  of  legions,  no 
violence  of  martyrdoms,  can  slay  the  infant  Church  of 

^  Dan.  viii.  10  (of  Autioclius  Epiplianes). 
■^  Isa.  Ixvi.  7,  8. 

3  The  narrative  is  doubtless  coloured  by  the  perils  and  escapes  of  the 
Infant  Christ  (.Matt.  ii.  11—15). 

4  Suet.  Ner.  6. 

^  Tlie  "  seven "  may  include  Julius  Caesar ;  or,  excluding  him,  may 
include  Otho.  In  the  days  of  Julius,  however,  the  name  Imperator  had 
not  acquired  its  exclusive  significance,  and  he  never  had  the  title  of 
Princeps.  Apocalyptic  symbolism,  dealing  in  mystic  numbers,  does  not 
greatly  trouble  itself  with  these  minor  details.  Thus  the  seven  heads  of 
tiie  Beast  serve  alike  to  symbolise  seven  hills  and  seven  Emperors.  The 
Dragon  is  at  once  Satan  and  the  representative  of  Satan — the  Empire  of 
Pagan  Rome. 


280  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Christ.  The  Mother  Church,  the  Church  of  Jerusalem, 
which,  as  it  were,  rocks  the  cradle  of  Gentile  Christianity, 
is  saved  alike  from  Idumeans,  and  Zealots,  and  the 
Eoman  armies  which  advance  to  besiege  the  Holy 
City.  She  flies  to  the  mountains ;  to  the  wilderness  ; 
to  the  secure  and  desolate  region  of  Pella,  in  which 
town,  on  the  edge  of  the  deserts  of  Arabia,^  at  an  early 
period  of  the  impending  siege,  the  Cliristiaiis  took 
refuge,  in  accordance  with  their  Lord's  command.'^ 
They  thus  escaped  the  horrors  of  the  three  and  a  half 
years  which  elapsed  between  a.d.  67,  when  Vespasian 
began  his  dreadful  work  in  Judea,  and  September, 
A.D.  70,  when  the  city  and  Temple  perished  in  blood 
and  flame. 

The  attempts  of  the  dragon  are  practically  fore- 
doomed. Michael  and  his  Angels  have  warred  against 
him,  and  flung  him  down  to  earth.  There  is  no  place 
for  him  in  Heaven  as  an  accuser  of  the  brethren,  because 
the  blood  of  the  Lamb  and  the  blood  of  the  martyrs 
prevails  against  him.  His  great  wrath  must  be  con- 
fined to  earth,  and  that  only  for  a  little  time.^ 

He  rages  against  the  sun-clad  woman,  but  she 
escapes  from  him  into  the  wilderness,  with  the  two 
great  eagle-wings  of  divine  protection.^  There  may 
have  been,  and  doubtless  was,  an  attempt  to  pursue 
and  murder  the  flying  Christians.  We  know  that  de- 
sertion from  the  city  was  checked  by  the  most  violent 

'  Josephus  says  of  Perea,  "  its  eastoru  limits  reach  to  Arabia " 
{B.  J.  iii.  3,  §  3).     Pella  is  now  Tabakat  Fahil. 

-  Matt.  xxiv.  16  ;  Luke  xxi.  21. 

^  Comp.  Lukox.  18.  "I  behold  Satau  as  lig'htnincf  fallen  from  heaven," 
John  xii.  31.  "  Now  is  the  judgment  of  tliis  world,  now  shall  the  prince 
of  this  world  be  cast  out  "  (comp.  1  John  iii.  8). 

"*  For  eagles'  wings  as  the  symbol  of  the  Divine  protection,  see  Ex. 
xix.  4 ;  Deut.  xxxii.  11. 


VISION  OF   THE  WILD   BEAST.  281 

measures.  Had  any  details  of  the  flight  to  Pella 
been  preserved  to  us,  we  should  understand  what  is 
exactly  meant  by  the  dragon  vomiting  out  of  his 
mouth  water  as  a  river  that  she  might  be  swept  away, 
and  by  the  earth  helping  her  and  swallowing  the  river. 
When  Vespasian  sent  Placidus  to  chase  the  Jewish 
fugitives  from  Gadara,  they  were  stopped  by  the 
swollen  waters  of  the  Jordan,  and  being  compelled  to 
hazard  a  battle,  were  driven  in  multitudes  into  the 
river,  and  15,000  of  them  perished.^  It  is  very  pro- 
bable that  some  such  obstacle  may  have  impeded  the 
flight  of  the  Christians,  and  that  while  they  were 
enabled  to  escape  safely  by  some  manifestation  of  special 
Providence,  many  of  their  pursuers  perished  in  the 
swollen  stream. 

The  next  Vision  is  not  only  plain,  but  must  hence- 
forth be  regarded  as  so  certain  in  its  significance  as  to 
furnish  us  with  a  point  de  repere  for  all  Apocalyptic 
interpretations.  It  is  the  Vision  of  the  Wild  Beast 
from  the  Sea ;  and  beyond  all  shadow  of  doubt  or  un- 
certainty, the  Wild  Beast  from  the  Sea  is  meant  as  a 
symbol  of  the  Emperor  Nero.  Here,  at  any  rate,  St. 
John  has  neglected  no  single  means  by  which  he  could 
make  his  meaning  clear  without  deadly  peril  to  him- 
self and  the  Christian  Church. 

He  describes  this  Wild  Beast  by  no  less  than 
sixteen  distinctive  marks,  and  then  all  but  tells  us  in 
so  many  words  the  name  of  the  person  whom  it  is 
intended  to  symbolise. 

These  distinctive  marks  are  as  follows  : — 

1 .  It  rises  from  the  sea  ; — by  which  is  perhaps  indi- 
cated not  only  a  Western  power,  and  therefore,  to  a  Jew, 

1  Jos.  B.  J.  iv.  7,  §  5. 


282  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

a  power  beyond  the  sea/  but  perhaps  especially  one  con- 
nected with  the  sea-washed  peninsula  of  Italy.^ 

2.  It  is  a  Beast  like  one  of  Daiiiers  four  Beasts,  but 
more  portentous  and  formidable.  Daniel's  four  Beasts 
were  the  Chaldean  lion,  the  Median  bear,  the  Persian  pan- 
ther, and  the  Beast  of  Greek  dominion,  of  which  the  ten 
horns  represent  the  ten  successors  of  Alexander,^  and  the 
little  horn  represents  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  St.  John's 
Beast  being  the  all-comprehensive  Roman  power,  is  a 
combination  of  Daniel's  Beasts.  It  is  a  panther,  with 
bear's  feet  and  a  lion's  mouth.  It  has  seven  heads,* 
which  indicate  (in  the  apparently  arbitrary  but  perfectly 
normal  vagueness  of  Jewish  apocalyptic  symbolism) 
both  the  seven  hills  of  Rome  and  seven  kings.^  The 
Beast  is  a  symbol  interchangeably  of  the  Roman  empire 
and  of  the  Emperor.  In  fact,  to  a  greater  degree  than  at 
any  period  of  history,  the  two  were  one.  Roman  history 
had  dwindled  down  into  a  personal  drama.  The  Roman 
Emperor  could  say  with  literal  truth,  "■  VEtat  cest  moH' 
And  a  Wild  Beast  was  a  Jew's  natural  symbol  either 
for  a  Pagan  kingdom  or  for  its  autocrat.  When  St. 
Paul  was  delivered  from  Nero,  or  his  representative,  he 
says  quite  naturally  that  "  he  was  delivered  out  of  the 
mouth  of  the  lion  "  (2  Tim.  iv.  17  ;  comp.  Heb.  xi.  33). 
When  he  is  alluding  to  his  struggles  with  the  mob  and 

1  In  the  Sibylline  Oracles  (iii.  176)  the  beast  rises  "  from  the  Western 
sea."     In  2  Esclras  xi.  1  the  Eagle  (Rome)  comes />-om  the  sea. 

■^  Such  is  the  not  improbable  conjecture  of  Ewald.  From  xvii.  15  we 
miglit  explain  it  of  "  the  peoples,  and  multitudes,  and  nations,  and 
tongues,"  ever  which  Rome  ruled.  In  Sliabbath,  f.  56  b,  we  are  told  that 
wlion  Solomon  married  Pliaraoh's  daughter,  Gabriel  thrust  a  reed  into  the 
sea,  and  of  tlio  mud  formed  an  island,  on  which  Rome  was  built. 

'•^  Tlie  Diadochi,  as  they  wei-e  called.     See  Grote,  xii.  362. 

*  Comp.  Orac.  SibyU.  iii.  176,  where  also  the  many-headed  boast  is 
Rome.  "  Rev.  xvii.  9,  10. 


THE   WILD   BEAST.  283 

their  leaders  at  Ephesus,  he  describes  it  as  "  fighting 
with  wild  beasts  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  32).  When  Marsyas 
announced  to  Agrippa  I.  the  death  of  Tiberius,  he  did 
so  in  the  words,  "  the  lion  is  dead."  ^  Princes,  as  well 
as  kingdoms,  had  been  described  under  the  same  symbol 
by  the  Old  Testament  prophets.^  Esther,  in  the  Jewish 
legends,  was  said  to  have  spoken  of  Xerxes  as  "  the 
lion."  Lactantius  speaks  of  Nero  as  a  tam  mala  hestia? 
But,  besides  all  these  reasons,  which  made  the  symbol  so 
easily  intelligible,  Eenan  may  be  right  in  conjecturing 
that  there  was  yet  another.  It  was  that,  on  an  occasion 
which  was  exceptionally  infamous  even  for  Nero,  he  had 
been  disguised  as  a  wild  beast,  and  in  that  disguise  had 
been  let  loose  from  a  cage  and  personated  the  furies  of 
a  tiger  or  panther.'* 

3.  This  wild  beast  of  Heathen  Power  has  ten  horns, 
which  represent  the  ten  main  provinces  of  Imperial 
Pome.^  It  has  the  power  of  the  dragon — that  is,  it 
possesses  the  Satanic  dominion  of  the  "  prince  of  the 
power  of  the  air." 

4.  On  each  of  its  heads  is  the  name  of  blasphemy. 
Every  one  of  the  seven  "  kings,"  however  counted,  had 

^  Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  6,  §  10.  ^  Ezek.  xix.  1 — 9. 

3  The  Sibyllists  call  Nero  "  the  Beast."     Be  Mort.  Persec.  2. 

*  L'Anteclirist,  p.  175.  Suet.  Ner.  29.  I  am  told  that  to  this  day,  in 
the  Had  Gadyo,  which  the  Jews  of  Germany  use  at  the  Passover,  their  old 
persecutors  are  compared  to  various  animals. 

^  Ten  horns,  as  in  Dan.  vii.  24.  There  they  are  the  Diadochi ;  here 
the  provinces  of  Italy,  Achaia,  Asia,  Syria,  Egypt,  Africa,  Spain,  Gaul 
Britain,  Germany  (Reuan,  L'Antechrist,  j).  13).  The  history  of  this 
troubled  epoch  amply  justifies  the  additional  touch  of  description  in 
which,  later  on,  they,  in  conjunction  with  the  Beast  {i.e.,  the  Provincial 
Governors  and  Generals,  together  with  the  Emperor),  hate  the  harlot 
{i.e.,  the  City  of  Rome,  and  the  Senatus  Fopulusque  Romanus),  and 
devoiir  her  flesh,  &c.  Again  and  again  in  the  civil  disorders  Rome  was 
brouglit  by  Emperors  and  Pi'oconsuls  to  the  verge  of  ruin  and  despair. 


284  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

borne  the  (to  Jewish  ears)  blasphemous  surname  of 
Augustus  {Seba-sfos,  "  one  to  be  adored  ") ;  had  received 
apotheosis,  and  been  spoken  of  as  Divus  after  his  death  ; 
had  been  honoured  with  statues,  adorned  with  divine 
attributes ;  had  been  saluted  with  divine  titles ;  and  in 
some  instances  had  been  absolutely  worshipped,  and  that 
in  his  lifetime,  with  temples  and  flamens — especially  in 
the  Asiatic  provinces. 

5.  The  diadems  are  on  the  horns,  because  the  Roman 
Proconsuls,  as  delegates  of  the  Emperor,  enjoy  no  little 
share  of  the  Caesarean  autocracy  and  splendour ;  but — 

6.  The  name  of  blasphemy  (for  such  is  the  true  read- 
ing) is  only  on  the  heads,  because  the  Emperor  alone 
receives  divine  honour,  and  alone  bears  the  daring  title 
of  "  Augustus." 

7.  One  of  the  heads  is  wounded  to  death^  hut  the 
deadly  wound  is  healed.  If  there  could  be  any  doubt 
that  this  indicates  the  violent  end,  and  universally 
expected  return  of  Nero — or,  which  is  the  same  thing 
for  prophetic  purposes,  of  one  like  him — that  doubt 
seems  to  be  removed  by  the  parallel  description  of  the 
1 7th  chapter,  where  we  are  told  that  of  the  seven  kings 
of  the  mystic  Babylon — 

8.  TJie  five  are  fallen,  the  one  is,  the  other  is  not 
yet  come;  <7;?^  "  the  Beast  that  thou  sawest  was,  and  is 
not,  and  is  about  to  come  out  of  the  abyss ; "  "  the  Beast 
that  was  and  is  not,  even  he  is  an  eighth,  and  is  of  the 
seven," ^  Can  language  be  more  apparently  perplexing  ? 
Yet  its  solution  is  obvious.  No  explanation  worth  the 
name  has  ever  been  oifered  of  this  enigma  except  that 
which  makes  it  turn  on  the  widespread  expectation  that 

'  Just  as  the  eagle's  head  (Nero)  iu  2  Esdras  xi.  1,  36. 

2  Rev.  xvii.  8,  10,  11.     In  ver.  8  the  true  reading  is  koI  napfo-Tai. 


THE  WILD  BEAST.  285 

Nero  was  either  not  really  dead,  or  that,  even  if  dead, 
he  would  in  some  strange  way  return.  Only  two  or 
three  slaves  and  people  of  humble  rank  had  seen  his 
corpse.  All  of  these,  except  one  or  two  soldiers  and  a 
single  freedman  of  Gralba,  had  been  his  humble  adherents. 
It  seemed  inconceivable  that  after  a  hundred  years  of 
absolutism  the  last  of  the  deified  race  of  Caesars  should 
thus  disappear  like  foam  upon  the  water.  The  five  kings 
are  Augustus,  Tiberius,  Grains  (Caligula),  Claudius,  and 
Nero.  Since  the  seer  is  writing  in  the  reign  of  Galba, 
the  fifth  king  (Nero)  was,  and  is  not ;  Otho,  the  seventh 
king,  was  not  yet  come.  When  he  came,  which  could 
not  be  long  delayed,  for  Galba  was  an  old  man— he  was 
to  reign  for  a  short  time,  and  then  was  to  come  the 
eighth,  who,  it  was  expected,  would  be  Nero  again,  one 
of  the  previous  seven,  and  so  both  the  fifth  and  the 
eighth.  For,  strange  to  say,  Nero  still  lived  in  the 
regrets  alike  of  Romans  and  of  Parthians.^  Since  Rome 
is  the  great  city  (xvii.  18),  and  the  ten  horns  its  pro- 
vincial governors — ■"  kings  who  had  received  no  kingdom 
as  yet"  (xvii.  12)^ — it  seems  difficult  even  to  imagine 
any  other  explanation  of  symbols  which  it  is  quite  clear 
that  the  Apostle  meant  to  be  understood,  and  which  he 
assumed  loould  be  understood,  since  otherwise  they  would 
have  been  useless  to  his  readers.  But,  after  he  has  thus 
all  but  told  us  in  so  many  words  whom  he  means,  the 
seer  continues  the  hints  by  which  he  describes  the  cha- 
racteristics of  the  Beast,     He  says  that — 

9.   "  All  the   earth    loondered   after    the  Beast."     In 

1  Suet.  Ner.  49,  50,  57 ;  Tac.  H.  i.  2,  78 ;  ii.  8 ;  Dion  Cassius,  Ixiv. ; 
and  Dio.  Chrysost.  Orat.  xxi.  10. 

^  As  yet — but  several  of  them  were  to  do  so  in  the  course  of  the 
next  few  years.     This  completely  disposes  of  the  sujjposed  refutation  of 


286  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

that  day  men  rejoiced  in  the  omnipotence  of  evil,  and 
did  homage  to  it  in  its  concrete  form.  The  Eoman 
plebs  had  become  "  sottish,  licentious,  gamblers;"  and 
one  who  was  more  gigantically  sottish  than  themselves 
liad  become  their  ideal. ^  The  best  comment  on  this  par- 
ticular may  be  found  in  the  description  of  Tacitus  of  the 
manner  in  whicli  all  Home,  from  its  proudest  senators 
down  to  its  humblest  artisans,  poured  forth  along  the 
public  ways  to  receive  with  acclamations  the  guilty 
wi'etch  who  was  returning  from  Campania  with  his 
hands  red  with  his  murdered  mother's  blood. ^ 

10.  That  the  world  "  ioorsJiij)j)ed  the  dragon,  who  gave 
his  poioer  to  the  Beast,''  would  be  a  natural  Jewish  way 
of  indicating  the  belief  that  the  Pagan  world,  when  it 
offered  holocausts  for  its  Emperor,  was  adoring  devils  for 
deities.^ 

11.  The  cries  of  the  world,  "  IFho  is  like  unto  the 
Beast?  who  is  able  to  make  war  loith  him?  "  sound  like 
an  echo  of  the  shouts  "  Victories  Olympic !  victories 
Pythian  !  Nero  the  Hercules  !  ISTero  Apollo  !  Sacred 
one  !  The  One  of  the  ^Eon,"  i.e.,  unparalleled  in  all  the 
world !  with  which  Dion  Cassius  tells  us  that  he  was 
greeted  by  the  myriads  of  the  populace,  when,  with 
the  crowns  of  his  ISOO  artistic  triumphs,  he  returned 
from  his  insane  and  degraded  perambulation  of 
Greece. 

12.  "  The  mouth  speaking  great  things  and  blasphemies  " 
is  the  mouth  whicli  was  incessantly  uttering  the  most 

the  views  here  maintained  ou  the  plea  tliat  the  Roman  Emperors  did 
not  wear  diadems.  The  ten  horns  are  kingdoniless  kings  (i.e.,  Provincial 
Governors),  and  yet  even  these  horns  are  diademed  (xiii.  1). 

1  Maurice,  Bevel,  p.  238. 

2  Tac.  Ann.  xiv.  13.     Dion  Cass.  Ixi.  IG.     Suet.  Ner.  39. 

3  1  Cor.  .X.  20. 


THE   WILD   BEAST.  287 

monstrous  boasts  and  pretensions,^  declaring  that  no 
one  before  himself  had  the  least  conception  of  what 
things  an  Emperor  might  do,  and  of  the  lengths  to 
which  he  could  go  ;  the  mouth  which  ordered  the  erec- 
tion of  his  own  colossus,  120  feet  high,  adorned  with 
the  insignia  and  attributes  of  the  sun."  As  for  his 
blasphemies,  Suetonius  tells  us  that  he  was  an  avowed 
and  even  contemptuous  atheist — "religionum  usquequa- 
que  contemptor."  ^ 

13.  '' Poiver  was  given  Mm  to  act^ fori y -two  months." 
The  exact  significance  of  this  mystic  number,  which  is 
also  described  as  12G0  days  (xi.  2;  xii.  6),  and  as  "a 
time,  times,  and  half  a  time"  (xii.  14),  is  variously 
explained.  The  simplest  explanation  is  that  it  refers  to 
the  time  which  elapsed  between  the  beginning  of  Nero's 
persecution  in  Nov.,  64,  and  his  death  in  June,  68, 
which  is  almost  exactly  three  and  a  half  years. 

14.  "  It  was  given  Mm  to  make  loar  loith  the  saints, 
and  to  overcome  them,'^  for  it  was  he  who  began  the 
terrible  era  of  martyrdom,  and  put  "  a  vast  multitude  " 
to  death  with  hideous  tortures  on  a  false  accusation.^ 

15.  '' Poioer  was  given  him  over  all  Mndreds,  and 
tongues,  and  nations."  Of  the  representatives  of  the 
world-powers  in  that  day,   Grreece  received   him   with 


1  The  "  moutli  speaking  great  tMngs "  of  Antioelius  Epiplianes,  in 
Dan.  vii.  8,  20,  never  uttered  half  such  monstrous  boasts  as  that  of  Nero. 

2  Pliny,  H.  N.  xxxix.  7.  Suet.  Ner.  30—32.  Dion  Cass.  Ixvi.  15. 
Mart.  Spectac.  ii.  1,  Ep.  i.  71.  It  required  twenty-four  elephants  to 
drag  it  away  in  the  reign  of  Hadi-ian.     Spart.  Hadr.  19. 

^  Nero,  56.  Tlie  first  object  of  his  veneration  was  tlie  Syrian  goddess 
"  hanc  mox  ita  sprevit  ut  uriua  contaminaret." 

*  xiii.  5.  iroiriaai.  Can  hardly  mean  "  to  continue  "  as  in  the  English 
version.  It  must  mean  "  to  act,"  "  to  do  what  he  will ; "  and,  if  so,  the 
addition  of  '6  e4\ei  in  «  is  at  least  a  correct  gloss. 

^  Tac.  Ann.  xv.  44. 


288  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

frantic  adulation,  Parthia  was  in  friendly  relations  with 
him,  and  Armenia,  in  the  person  of  Tiridates,  laid  its 
diadem  before  his  feet.^  Even  Herod  the  Great,  though 
himself  a  powerful  king,  had  been  accustomed  to  talk 
of  the  "Almighty  Romans." 

IG.  All  ''the  inhahitants  of  the  earth,  except  the  fol- 
lowers of  the  Lamb,  loorshipped  him.'  This,  as  we  have 
seen,  was  literally  true  of  the  Emperors,  both  in  their 
lifetime  and  after  their  death.  At  this  dreadful  period 
the  cult  of  the  Emperor  was  almost  the  only  sincere 
worship  which  still  existed." 

Then  follow  two  verses  (xiii.  9,  10)  which  do  not  bear 
directly  upon  the  symbol.  They  are  either  a  prophecy 
of  retribution  given  for  the  consolation  of  the  suffering 
saints,^  or,  if  we  take  what  seems  on  the  whole  to  be 
the  more  probable  reading,  they  are  a  declaration  that 
the  saints  must  indeed  suffer,  but  that  their  sufferings 
should  be  endured  in  faith  and  patience.^ 

In  these  paragraphs,  then,  we  have  sixteen  hints 
as  to  who  and  what  is  intended  by  the  Apocalyptic 
AVild  Beast,  and  it  is  undeniable  that  every  one  of 
these  directly  points  to  Home  and  Nero.  They  point 
so  directly  to  Eome  and  to  Nero  that  it  is  difficult 
to  conceive  how  the  writer  could  have  expressed 
his  meaning  less  enigmatically,  if  he  adopted  at  all 
that  well- understood  literary  method  of  Jewish  Apoca- 
lypses which  was  enigmatical  in  its  very  nature.^     The 

1  Tac.  Ann.  xiv.  26 ;  Suot.  Ner.  13. 

-  See  Boissier,  Lalicligion  Bomaine,  i.  122—208.  Augustus  disliked 
all  personal  worship,  and  insisted  that  his  cult  sliould  be  joined  to  that 
of  Rome.  But  Caligula  claimed  to  be  worshipped  in  person  (Suet.  Cal. 
21),  and  Nero  received  apotheosis  in  his  lifetime.     Tac.  Ann.  xv.  74. 

•*  Perhaps  an  allusion  to  Nero's  supposed  death  and  flight. 

*  Rev.  xiii.  10. 

''  How  strange  were  the  symbolic  devices  of  Apocalyptists  we  see  in 


NERO.  289 

most  remarkable  indication  tliat  Nero  is  mainly  in- 
tended is  that  it  is  exactly  in  the  most  enigmatical  par- 
ticulars that  the  resemblance  is  most  close.  He  was 
mortally  wounded,  and  yet  (according  to  the  then  belief, 
which  is  here  adopted  for  purposes  of  description,  and 
which  was  symbolically  though  not  literally  true)  the 
wound  was  healed ;  and  he  was  a  fifth  king  who  was,  and 
is  not,  and  yet  (so  St.  John  indicates  him  by  the  popular 
belief)  should  be  once  more  the  eighth  king,  and  one  of 
the  seven. ^  If  we  had  not  the  perfectly  simple  clue  to 
what  was  indicated  by  this  strangely  riddling  descrip- 
tion, we  might  give  up  the  interpretation  as  insoluble  ; 
but  the  clue  is  preserved  for  us,  not  only  by  Jewish 
Talmudists,^  and  Pagan  historians  and  authors,  such  as 
Tacitus,^  Suetonius,^  Dion  Cassius,^  and  Dion  Chry- 
sostom  f  but  also  by  Christian  fathers  like  St.  Irenseus,^ 
Lactantius,^  St.  Victorinus,  Sulpicius  Severus,^  and  the 
Sibylline  books  ;  ^^  and  even  by  St.  Jerome  ^^  and  by  St. 

the  8tli  Book  of  the  Sibyllines,  where  Hadrian  is  described  as  "  having  a 
name  like  that  of  a  sea  "  (the  Hadriatic),  and  is  called  "  the  ■m.'etched 
one,"  because  of  the  resemblance  of  his  name  (^lianus)  to  the  Greek 
eleeinos  {Orac.  Sib.  viii.  52,  59). 

^  It  was  believed  that  he  would  return  from  the  East,  by  the  aid  of 
Parthians,  among  whom  he  was  thought  to  have  taken  refuge. 

^  The  tract  Gittin,  quoted  by  Grjitz,  Gesch.  d.  Judenth.  vol.  iv.  p.  203. 

3  Tac.  Eist.  ii.  8. 

*  Suet.  Ner.  57,  et  ibi  Casauhon. 

^  Dion  Cass.  Xiphilinus,  Ixiv.  9.  See  Zonaras,  Ann.  xi.  15—18.  The 
expectation  was  most  current  in  Asia  Minor,  and  Nero's  thoughts  were 
incessantly  turned  to  the  East  by  astrologers,  etc.  Tac.  Hist.  ii.  95 ; 
Anyi.  XV.  36.     Suet.  Ner.  40 — 47. 

*  Dion  Chrysost.  Orat.  xxi.  (i.  j).  504,  ed.  Reiske :  "  Even  now  all 
desire  him  to  live,  and  most  persons  think  that  he  is  still  alive.") 

^  Iren.  I.e. 

*  Lactant.  De  Mort.  Persec.  2. 

^  Sulp.  Sever.  Hist.  Sac.  ii.  28.     "  It  is  the  current  opinion  of  many 
that  he  is  yet  to  come  as  Antichrist."     This  was  wi'itten  a.d.  403. 
'»  Sibyll.  V.  33 ;  viii.  71.  "  Jer.  In  Dan.  xi.  28. 

t 


290  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Augustine.^  Nothing  can  prove  more  decisively  than 
these  references  that  for  four  centuries  many  Christians 
identified  Nero  with  the  Beast.  An  Eastern  kingdom 
had  long  been  promised  to  him  by  soothsayers.^  The 
author  of  the  Ascension  of  Isaiah  says  that  Beliar  shall 
descend  from  the  sky  in  the  form  of  man,  an  impious 
king,  the  murderer  of  his  mother  {i.e,,  in  the  form 
of  Nero).^  So,  too,  Commodianus,  in  the  third  cen- 
tury, talks  of  Nero  being  raised  from  the  under- 
world.^ Nay  more,  we  can  appeal  to  the  earliest 
extant  Greek  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse — that  of 
Andreas,  Bishop  of  the  Cappadocian  CaBsarea,  who  says 
that  "  the  king  of  the  Romans  shall  come  as  Antichrist 
to  destroy "  the  four  kingdoms  of  Daniel.  It  would 
have  been  strange  that  the  Christian  world  should  have 
felt  any  doubt  that  Nero  is  intended,  if  all  history  did 
not  show  the  extent  to  which  dogmatic  bias — which 
only  resorts  to  Scripture  in  order  to  find  there  its  own 
ready-made  convictions — has  dominated  for  centuries 
over  simple  and  straightforward  exegesis.  But  as 
though  to  exclude  any  possibility  of  doubt  about  the 
matter,  St.  John,  after  all  these  clear  indications,  has 
all  but  told  us  in  express  words  the  name  of  the  man 
whom  he  means  by  his  Antichrist  and  Wild  Beast — • 
by  this  deified  yet  slain  and  to-be-resuscitated  murderer 
of  the  saints.  He  does  so  in  the  last  verses  of  the 
chapter.  They  furnish  a  seventeenth  detail,  in  which 
the  indications  of  the  seer  point  immediately  and  dis- 
tinctly to  the  worst  of  the  Roman  Emperors. 

'  Ang.  De  Civ.  Dei,  xx.  19,  3.  "  Uncle  nonnnlli  ipsum  (Neronem) 
resurrecturura  et  f uturum  Auticliristuin  snspicantur,  alii  vero  nee  occisun 
putant  sed  subtractum  potius." 

^  Suet.  Ner.  40.       ^  Ascens.  Is.  iv.  2 — 14.        *  Commodian.  Instr.  41. 


NUMBER    OF    THE   BEAST.  291 

17.  "Here  is  wisdom,"  he  says  (chap.  xiii.  18)  ;  or, 
as  he  expresses  it  in  chap.  xvii.  9,  "  wisdom  is  needed 
to  grasp  the  meaning  of  my  symbol ;  "  or,  perhaps,  as 
Ewald  understands  it,  "  this  is  the  sense, — whoever  has 
wisdom  will  understand  it  thus."  "  Let  him  that  hath 
understanding  count  the  number  of  the  Beast ;  for  it  is 
the  number  of  a  man.''  In  other  words,  he  tells  us  that 
he  now  intends  to  indicate  numerically  the  name  which 
he  dared  not  actually  express.  A  Jew  or  Jewish  Chris- 
tian would  at  once  be  aware  that  he  now  intends  to  ffive 
an  instance  of  one  of  the  forms  of  that  Kabbalistic 
method,  of  which  traces  are  found  even  in  the  ancient 
prophets,  and  which  was  known  to  the  Eabbis  as 
Gem  atria,  i.e..  Geometry,  or  the  numerical  indication  of 
names. ^  Gentile  Christians  were  not  so  familiar  with 
this  method ;  ^  but  we  see  from  Irenseus  that  they  could 
easily   have    got   the    general   clue    from  their   Judaic 

^  For  an  account  of  Gematria,  and  numerous  illustrations  of  it,  I  may- 
refer  to  my  pajoer  on  Rabbinic  Exegesis  in  the  Expositor  for  1877,  vol.  v. 
Similarly  among  Egyptian  mystics  the  God  Thouth  was  spoken  of  by 
the  cypher  1218.  On  the  Gnostic  gems  the  word  Abraxas  is  used  as 
isopsephic  to  Meithras  (the  Sun)  because  the  letters  of  both  names 
=  325. 

"■'  It  was,  however,  by  no  means  unknown  to  educated  Greeks  under 
the  name  of  isopsepliia.  For  instance,  they  called  verses  isopsephics 
when  their  letters  made  up  numerically  the  same  sum.  In  the  Anthology 
we  find  an  epigram  which  begins — 

"  One,  hearing  the  words  Demagoras  and  Plague  (Loimos),  which  are 
of  equal  numerical  value  " — 
which  he  could  test  in  a  moment,  since,  in  Greek  letters,  Demagoras  is — 

4  +  1  +  40  +  1  +  3  +  70  +  100  +  1  +  200  =  420 
AAMATO  PA2 

and  Loimos  (Plague)  is — 

30  +  70  +  10  +  40  +  70  +  200  =  420 

AG  I         M        O         2 

There  are  isopsephic  inscriptions  in  the  Corpus  Inscr.  Grcec.  3544 — 3546. 
(See  Aul.  Gell.  xiv.  14.) 

t    2 


292  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITT. 

brethren,  to  whom  the  Apocalypse  is  mainly  addressed.^ 
There  was  not  much  danger  of  a  secret  being  betrayed 
which  might  cost  the  life  of  any  one  who  mentioned 
it,  and  at  the  same  time  imperil  the  whole  community. 
What  St.  John  says  in  effect  is :  "I  shall  now  give 
you  the  name  of  the  Wild  Beast  in  its  numerical 
value.  You  have  heard  m  my  specimens  of  this  method, 
so  that  you  can  apply  it  in  this  instance,  though  I  warn 
you  that  it  may  give  you  some  difficulty."  He  evidently 
intended  some  of  them  to  find  out  the  number  of  the 
Beast,  which  was  also  the  number  of  a  man,  while  he 
pointed  out  that  there  was  one  unexpected  element 
in  the  particular  solution.  If  it  had  been  merely  a 
name  in  the  numerical  value  of  its  Greek  letters  there 
would  have  been  so  little  difficulty  about  it  that  any 
ordinarily  educated  reader  might  have  discovered  it 
after  a  few  trials.  He  would  only  have  to  find  out 
what  living  men  there  were  who  had  the  dozen  or 
more  attributes  which  the  seer  had  given  to  the  Beast, 
and  whose  names,  counted  by  the  value  of  the  letters, 
made  up  the  number  of  ^QQ.  As  there  was  scarcely 
ant/  other  living  person  to  whom  the  Apocalyptic  de- 
scription could  apply,  Nero's  was  probably  the  first 
name  which  a  Jewish  Christian  reader  would  have 
tried.  And  here  he  would  have  been  at  once  baffled. 
In  Greelx  letters  he  would  have  found  that  Nerun  made 
50  +  5  +  100  +  800  +  50  =  1005.      If  he    tried   Neron 

^  The  Sibyllist  describes  Nero  as  the  Emperor  wliose  sign  is  50, 
"  a  fearful  serpent  who  shall  cause  a  grievous  tvar."  N,  tlie  iuitial  letter 
of  Nero,  —  50.  I  have  ah-eady  referred  to  tlio  fauey  of  Baniabas  about 
Abraham's  318  servants  as  represented  by  IHT,  and  so  a  sort  of  symbol 
of  Jesus  on  tlio  Cross.  Similarly  in  Tertullian  {Carm..  adv.  Marc.  iii.  4), 
the  victory  of  Gideon's  300  is  connected  ■with  the  fact  that  300  =  T, 
the  sig^  of  tho  Cross  :  "  Hoc  etiam  siguo  pracdouum  stravit  acorvos." 


NUMBER    OF  THE  BEAST.  293 

Kaisar,  it  would  only  make  1005+332  =  1337.  Almost 
every  combination  which  he  tried  would  fail,  and  very 
possibly  he  would  give  up  the  task  in  despair,  with  the 
thought  that  he  did  not  possess  the  requisite  "  wis- 
dom," though  he  may  have  solved  many  such  problems 
in  Sibylline  or  similar  books.  Thus,  in  the  Sibylline 
books,  the  poet  indicates  the  name  Jesas,  in  Greek 
'Ir]aov<;,  by  saying  that  it  is  a  word  which  has  4  vowels 
and  2  consonants,  and  that  the  whole  number  is  equiva- 
lent to  8  units,  8  tens,  8  hundreds,  i.e.  888  {'Irjaov'i 
=  10  +  8  +  200  +  70  +  400  +  200  =  888),  and  no  G-reek- 
speaking  Christian  would  have  had  any  trouble  in 
solving  the  riddle.  Since,  however,  all  the  other  indi- 
cations pointed  so  clearly  to  Rome  and  Nero,  the  Greek 
Christian  reader  might  very  naturally  have  hit  upon 
"Latinus"  {Aaretvo^  =  30  +  1  +  300  +  5  +  10  +  50+70 
+  200  =  QQG)  as  a  sort  of  general  indication  of  Rome 
and  "  a  Latin  man."  This  accounts  for  the  prevalence  of 
this  explanation  among  the  Fathers,  beginning  with  St. 
Irenseus,  who  may  have  heard  it  from  St.  Polycarp,  who 
had  seen  St.  John  in  his  old  age.^  These  early  Chris- 
tian writers  were,  so  to  speak,  on  the  right  track ;  yet 
with  "  Latinus "  they  could  hardly  have  been  quite 
satisfied.  It  is  a  vague  adjective,  and  the  names  Latium 
and  Latinus  had  long  been  practically  obsolete.  If  this 
were  indeed  the  solution,  they  might  have  put  down  its 
vagueness  to  intentional  obscurity.  We  can  hardly 
conceive  what  care  a  Jewish  writer  had  to  take  if  he 
touched  in  any  respect  unfavourably  upon  the  imperial 
power  in  those  days  of  delators  and  laesa  majestas? 
Josephus  was  in  high  favour,  first  with  Poppsea  and 

^  Iren.  Adv.  Haer.  v.  30.     Hippoljt.  De  Christo,  p.  26. 

2  See  Tac.  Ann.  iii.  38;  iv.  50 ;  Hist.  i.  77.     Suet.  Ner.  32  :— "turn  lit 


294  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

then  with  the  Flavian  dynasty ;  at  Rome  he  was  so  great 
and  influential  that  he  probably  had  the  honour  of  a 
statue  in  the  imperial  city  :^ — 3'^et  he  stops  abruptly  in 
his  explanation  of  the  prophecies  of  Daniel,  with  a  mys- 
terious hint  that  he  does  not  deem  it  prudent  to  say 
more.^  This  evidently  was  because  he  feared  that,  if  he 
touched  on  any  explanation  of  the  work  of  destruction 
wrought  by  the  "  stone  cut  without  hands,"  he  might 
seem  to  be  threatening  future  ruin  and  extinction  to  the 
Eoman  empire;  and  to  do  this  wentbeyond  his  very  limited 
daring.  It  was  perhaps  the  complete  unsatisfactoriness 
of  the  solution  "  Laieinos  "  which  made  some  Christians, 
as  Irena^us  further  tells  us,  try  the  name  Teitan,  which 
also  gives  the  mystic  number  G66  (7<?^Y«;^  =  300  +  5+10 
+  300+1+50  =  666),  and  which  has  the  additional 
advantage  of  being  a  word  of  six  letters.  In  this 
instance  also  ingenuity  was  not  ver}'  far  astray ;  for 
Titan  was  one  of  the  old  poetic  names  of  the  Sun,  and 
the  Sun  was  the  deity  whose  attributes  Nero  most 
affected,  as  all  the  world  was  able  to  judge  from  seeing 
his  colossus  with  radiated  head,  of  which  the  substruc- 
ture of  the  base  still  remains  close  by  the  ruins  of  the 
Colosseum.^  The  mob  which  greeted  him  with  shouts 
of  "Nero-Apollo  !  "  were  well  aware  that  he  had  a  j)re- 
dilection  for  this  title. 

On  the  whole,  however,  the  Greek  Christians  must 
have   remained  a  little  perplexed,  a  little  dissatisfied, 

lege  majestatis,  facta  dictaquo  omnia,  quibus  modo  delator  uou  deesset 
tenerentur." 

^  Jiiv.  Sat.  i.  130. 

^  Jos.  Antt.  X.  10,  §  4  :  "  Daiiii'l  did  also  doclaro  the  meauiug  of  the 
stone  to  the  kiug  ;   hnt  I  do  not  tliinlc  proper  to  relate  it." 

^  What  was  meaut  by  the  guess  Euantha.^  is  uneertaiu.  Could  it  be 
an  allusion  to  the  "  aurea  caesaries  "  whidi  <2Te\v  dowu  over  Nero's  ucek  ? 


NUMBER  OF  THE   BEAST.  295 

and  must  have  been  inclined  to  say,  with  some  of  the 
Fathers/  that  only  time  could  reveal  the  secret ;  or  else 
to  believe  that  perhaps  there  was  more  than  one  solution. 
They  must,  however,  have  known  what  was  meant,  even 
if  the  exact  equi-numeration  of  any  words  which  they 
could  hit  upon  did  not  entirely  satisfy  them.  And  this 
was  the  general  condition  in  which  the  secret  remained 
in  the  early  Christian  Church.  At  any  rate  there  stood 
the  strange  number  before  them. 


X^i' 


The  very  look  of  it  was  awful.  The  first  letter  was  the 
initial  letter  of  the  name  of  Christ.  The  last  letter  was 
the  first  double-letter  [sf)  of  the  Cross  (^-Zauros).  Be- 
tween the  two  the  Serpent  stood  confessed  with  its 
writhing  sign  and  hissing  sound."  The  whole  formed 
a  triple  repetition  of  C,  the  essential  number  of  toil 
and  imperfection ;  and  this  numerical  symbol  of  the 
Antichrist,  ^^Qi,  stood  in  terrible  opposition  to  888 — 
the  three  perfect  8's  of  the  name  of  Jesus. 

But  Jewish  readers,  and,  as  we  have  said,  it  was  to 
Jewish  readers  that  the  Apocalypse  w^as  primarily  ad- 
dressed, would  find  none  of  the  difiiculties  which  per- 
plexed their  Gentile  fellow-Christians.  The  Apostle 
had  warned  them  that  the  solution  did  not  lie  so  much 
en  the  surface  as  was  usual  in  similar  enigmas.  Every 
Jewish  reader,  of  course,  saw  that  the  Beast  was 
a    symbol    for    Nero.^      And    both    Jews    and    Chris- 

*  Irenseus,  v.  30.  ^  Rev.  xii.  9 ;  xx.  2. 

^  Tlie  Sibyllists  had  already  spoken  of  Caligula  as  Beliar  {Carm.  iii. 
63),  aud  as  a  serpent.  The  stories  of  the  serpent  which  had  crawled 
from  Nero's  cradle,  aud  of  his  serpeut-amulet  (v.  supra,  p.  279)  would 
add  significance  to  the  sjuibolisiu. 


296  THE    EARLY  DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

tians  regarded  Nero  as  also  haviii<:]^  close  affinities 
with  the  serpent  or  dragon.  That  Nero  was  in- 
tended would  be  as  clear  to  a  Jew  as  that  Babylon 
meant  Rome,  though  Eome  is  never  mentioned.  He 
would  not  try  the  name  Nero  Ca3sar  in  Latin,  because 
isopsephia  (which  the  Jew  called  Gematrid)  was  almost  un- 
known among  the  Eomans,  and  their  alphabetic  numera- 
tion was  wholly  defective.  He  might  try  Nepcov  Kalaap 
in  Greek,  but  it  would  not  give  him  the  right  number. 
Then,  as  with  a  flash  of  intuition,  it  would  occur  to  him 
to  try  the  name  in  Hebrew?  The  Apostle  was  writing 
as  a  Hebrew,  was  evidently  thinking  as  a  Hebrew.^  His 
soloecistic  Greek  was  sufficient  to  prove  that  the  lan- 
guage was  unfamiliar  to  him,  and  that  all  persons  of 
whom  he  thought  would  primarily  present  themselves 
to  his  mind  by  their  Hebrew  designations.  This,  too, 
would  render  the  cryptograph  additionally  secure  against 
the  prying  inquisition  of  treacherous  Pagan  informers. 
It  would  have  been  to  the  last  degree  perilous  to  make 
the  secret  too  clear.  Accordingly,  the  Jewish  Christian 
would  have  tried  the  name  as  he  iliou(jht  of  the  name — 
that  is  in  Hebrew  letters.  And  the  moment  that  he  did 
this  the  secret  stood  revealed.  No  Jew  ever  thought  of 
Nero  except  as  "  Neron  Kesar,"  and  this  gives  at  once — 
^DP  rn:  =  50  +  200  +  6  +  50  +  100  +  60  +  200-6GC.' 

^  I  am  not  sure  that  a  Jew  would  not  have  tried  Hebrew  letters  at 
once.  A  Talniudic  scholar  wrote  to  tell  me  that  my  number  for  Rome 
{supra,  p.  220)  was  wrong,  because  he  had  tried  it  in  Hebrew  letters. 
It  had  not  occurred  to  him  to  try  it  in  Greek  letters ! 

-  See  the  startliug  Hebi'aism  in  the  Greek  of  Rev.  i.  4,  and  comp. 
Rev.  ix.  11;  xvi.  16. 

^  Tlie  name  was  so  written  in  Jewish  inscriptions.  See  Ewald,  Die 
Joliann.  Schriften,  ii.  203;  Buxtorf.  Lex.  Eabbin.  s.  v.  The  name  Csesarea 
appears  in  the  Talmixd  as  Y^cp.  Renan  mentions  the  remarkable  fact 
that  the  name  for  the  Antichrist  iu  Armenian  is  Nercn  (ii.  23).     Ewald 


GEMATRIA.  297 

Jewish  Christians  were  familiar  with  enigmas  of  this 
kind.  They  occur  even  in  the  ancient  Prophets  after 
the  days  of  Jeremiah,  and  are  found  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Scriptures/  The  Jewish  Christians  could  not  have 
hesitated  for  a  moment  in  the  conclusion  that  in  the 
Hebrew  name  of  Nero  the  solution  of  the  riddle  stood 
revealed.  The  Jews  were  remarkable  for  reticence,  and 
men  are  specially  liable  to  keep  their  secrets  to  them- 
selves when  they  involve  matters  of  life  and  death.  Many 
methods  and  secrets  of  Eabbinic  exegesis,  though  of  great 
value,  have  remained  unrevealed  by  Jews  to  Christians, 
simply  because  the  jealous  exclusiveness  and  haughty 
prejudice  of  that  singular  race — feelings  which,  it  must 
be  confessed,  have  been  due  in  no  small  degree  to  the 
brutality  of  their  enemies — makes  them  indifferent  to  the 
religious  views  of  others.  It  is,  therefore,  by  no  means 
remarkable  that  the  Asiatic  Judaists,  who  first  read  St. 
John's  Apocalypse,  did  not  betray  what  they  must  have 
recognised  to  be  the  name  which  exactly  corresponded 
with  the  number  of  the  Beast.  They  might  be  pardoned 
if  they  were  reluctant  to  place  their  lives  and  the  very 


found  that  Josippon  writes  the  name  iDp.  The  secret  has  been  almost 
simultaneously  re-discovered  of  late  years  by  Fritzsche  iu  Halle,  by 
Benary  in  Berlin,  by  Eeuss  in  Sti'asbourg,  and  by  Hitzig  in  Heidelberg. 
See  Bleek,  Vorlesimgen,  292  ff. ;  Krenkel,  Der  Apostel  Johannes,  88 ; 
Volkmar,  Offenbarung,  18  and  214.  Ewald  was  only  prevented  from 
making  the  discovery  in  1828  by  the  assumption,  which  he  afterwards 
found  to  be  erroneous,  that  Caesar  must  be  spelt  in  Hebrew  with  a  yod. 
He  therefore  conjectured  "  Csesar  of  Rome  "  (  C"n  ncp)  {Johann.  Schrift. 
ii.  263). 

^  Thus  in  Jerem.  li.  41,  "  Sheshach  "  stands  for  "  Babel,"  by  the  trans- 
mutation of  letters  known  as  Atbasli  (a  subspecies  of  what  the  Rabbis 
call  TJiemourah  or  "change");  and  in  li.  1,  "they  that  dwell  in  the  midst 
of  them,"  means  tlie  Chaldteans  {lebh  hamai  =  Kasdim) ;  and  in  Isa.  vii. 
6,  Tabeal,  by  another  sort  of  Themourah,  gives  us  the  name  of  Remaliah. 
See  my  Paper  iu  the  Expositor,  v.  375. 


298  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

existence  of  their  churches  at  the  mercy  of  Gentile  breth- 
ren, of  whose  prudence  and  fidelity  they  could  not  in 
every  instance  be  perfectly  secure.  Enou<^h,  however,  may 
have  escaped  them  to  put  others  in  the  right  direction ; 
and,  as  far  as  the  general  understanding  of  the  Apostle's 
meaning  was  concerned,  it  mattered  very  little  whether 
the  guessed  solution  was  Late'uws,  or  Teitan,  or  Neron 
Kesar,  since  all  three  words  w^re  but  varying  forms  of 
the  same  essential  thing.  All  the  earliest  Christian 
writers  on  the  Apocalypse,  from  Irenseus  down  to 
Victorinus  of  Pettau  ^  and  Commodian  in  the  fourth, 
and  Andreas  ^  in  the  fifth,  and  St.  Beatus  in  the  eighth 
centmy,  connect  Nero,  or  some  Eoman  Emperor,  with 
the  Apocalj^ptic  Beast. 

If  any  confirmation  could  possibly  be  wanting  to  this 
conclusion,  we  find  it  in  the  curious  fact  recorded  by 
Irena3us,  that,  in  some  copies,  he  found  the  reading  616. 
Now  this  change  can  hardly  have  been  due  to  careless- 
ness. The  letters  %|9'  were  so  singular,  even  in  their 
external  form,  that  no  one  could  have  been  likely  to  alter 
them  into  x^s^  or  616.^  But  if  the  above  solution  be 
correct,  this  remarkable  and  ancient  variation  is  at  once 
explained  and  accounted  for.  A  Jewish  Christian, 
trying  his  Hebrew  solution,  which  would  (as  he  knew) 
defend  the  interpretation  from  dangerous  Gentiles,  may 
have  been  puzzled  by  the  n  in  Neron  Kesar.     Although 


'  "  Hunc  ergo — sc.  Neronem — suscitatum  Deus  niittet  regem  dignum 
(liguis  et  Christum  qualem   ineracruut   Jiidaei"  (Vict.  Pett.    in  Apoc. 

xiii.)- 

^  uv   Kparr^fffi   6  'AvtIxp^ttos  ws   Vuiixaiuu   fia<n\evs   iXtvcrSnevos   (Andl*.). 

^  ii,i]KovTa  SfKa  e|,  is  tlie  reading  of  tlio  Codex  Epliraeiui.  Ireuaeus 
appeals  for  tlie  correctness  of  the  reading  GGG  not  only  to  all  the  good 
and  ancient  MSS.,  but  to  the  direct  testimony  of  those  who  had  seen 
Si.  John  [p.apTvpovvrti}V  a'vTwy  (Keifwv  Toif  Kar    ux^iu   Thv  'lwdvu7]y  ewpaK6ra)i'). 


NERO   REDIVIYUS.  299 

the  name  was  so  written  in  Hebrew,  he  knew  that  to 
Romans,  and  Gentiles  generally,  the  name  was  always 
Nero  Csesar,  not  Neron.  But  Nero  Kesar  in  Hebrew, 
omitting  the  final  n,  gave  G16,  not  ^^^^ ;  and  he  may 
have  altered  the  reading  because  he  imagined  that,  in  an 
unimportant  particular,  it  made  the  solution  more  suit- 
able and  easy. 

One  objection  will  at  once  be  made  to  this  solution. 
Nero,  it  will  be  said,  never  did  return.  The  belief  in 
his  return,  though  it  showed  an  obstinate  vitality,  was 
a  mere  chimsera.  St.  John  could  not  have  enshrined  in 
his  Apocalypse  what  turned  out  to  be  but  a  popular  mis- 
take. 

Such  an  objection  is  entitled  to  respect,  but  it  imports 
a  priori  considerations  into  a  plain  matter  of  exegesis. 
This  belief  about  Nero's  return  did  prevail  in  the 
Christian,  no  less  than  in  the  Pagan,  world.  It  is  found 
again  and  again  in  the  Sibylline  books,  and  in  later 
Christian  writers.  In  the  Pagan  world  it  led  to  the 
success  of  more  than  one  false  Nero.  It  is  probable  that 
one  of  these  was  making  himself  extremely  formidable 
in  the  very  region  in  which  St.  John  was  writing,  and  at 
that  very  time.^  In  the  Christian  world  the  belief  was 
still  existent  three  centuries  later,  that  Nero  would  re- 
turn in  person  as  the  future  Antichrist.  The  vividness 
of  the  contemporary  belief  must  be  measured  by  its  ex- 
traordinary permanence. 

We  have  no  right,  then,  to  frame  our  interpretation 
of  Scripture  by  our  theories  respecting  the  character 
and  limits  of  how  it  ought  to  be  written.  Our  duty 
is,  on  the  contrary,  to  discover  its  interpretation,  and  to 
be    guided  by   this   to   the   true    theory   of  its  claims. 

1  Tac.  IT.  i.  2;  ii.  8;  Suet.  iVer.  57 ;  Zouaras,  xi.  15,  18,  vfcc. 


300  THE   EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

When  we  study  the  meaning  of  a  passage,  our  sole  and 
our  solemn  aim  should  be  to  get  at  the  real  meaning, 
and  not  to  repudiate  or  to  gloss  over  that  meaning  in 
obedience  to  subjective  convictions.  We  should  not 
conceal  from  ourselves  that  to  get  rid  of  a  plain  explana- 
tion because  it  does  not  at  once  fall  in  with  our  ready- 
made  dogmas  is  a  dishonesty  which,  in  the  language  of 
the  Book  of  Job,  is  a  form  of  "  lying  for  God."  God's 
own  rebuke  to  Job's  three  friends  was  meant  to  teach 
mankind  for  ever  that  truth  and  charity  are  infinitely 
more  sacred  than  either  conventional  orthodoxy  or 
traditional  exegesis. 

In  reality,  however,  this  question  is  not  one  which  in 
any  way  aifects  the  dignity  of  revelation.  St.  John  uses 
the  common  belief,  as  he  might  have  used  any  other 
contemporary  fact,  or  any  other  contemporary  notion, 
merely  to  help  him  in  the  elaboration  of  his  symbol, 
and  to  enable  him  to  point  out  the  person  whom  he  is 
describing.  The  arrangement  of  the  symbolism  affects 
in  no  wise  the  truth  of  the  great  principles  which  he 
reveals.  The  Divine  hopes  and  consolations  of  which 
the  Apocalypse  is  full,  the  priceless  lessons  in  which  it 
abounds,  are  not  in  the  slightest  degree  affected  by  the 
circumstance  that  he  depicts  the  Neronian  Wild  Beast 
in  the  colours  which  every  other  historian,  whether 
secular  or  sacred,  would  have  used  for  his  delineation. 

But  farther,  be  it  observed  that,  even  if  this  detail  of 
Nero's  personal  return  had  been  meant  to  be  in  any  way 
essential  to  the  general  prediction,  it  was,  with  singular 
exactness,  symbolically  fulfilled.  Although  Nero  had  not 
(as  was  popularly  supposed)  taken  refuge  among  the 
Parthians,  and  never  was  restored  by  their  aid,  as  was 
the   common    expectation    of   that   day,    yet   such   an 


NERONIAN   ANTICHRISTS.  301 

anticipation,  is  not  directly  involved  in  the  Apocalypse, 
and  in  any  case  does  not  belong  to  its  essential  meaning. 
Every  successive  Antichrist  has  shown  the  Neronian 
characteristics.  If  the  prophecy  of  the  return  of  Elijah 
the  Prophet  was  adequately  fulfilled  in  the  ministry  of 
John  the  Baptist,  the  prophecy  of  the  returning  Nero 
was  adequately  fulfilled  in  Domitian,  in  Decius,  in  Dio- 
cletian, in  many  a  subsequent  persecutor  of  the  saints  of 
God.  Allegory  is  only  susceptible  of  allegoric  interpre- 
tation ;  and  in  the  person  of  Domitian,  as  we  shall  see 
further  on,^  the  prophecy  of  Antichrist  in  the  person  of 
Nero  redivivus  may  be  regarded  as  having  been  almost 
literally,  and  in  every  sense  symbolically,  fulfilled.  I  am 
well  aware  that  even  recent  English  commentators  have 
done  their  best  to  treat  this  view  of  the  Apocalypse 
with  suspicion  and  contempt,  to  treat  it  as  un- 
worthy of  their  modern  theory  of  "  verbal  dictation." 
Let  them  beware  lest  in  so  doing  they  be  haj)ly  found 
to  fight  against  God,  and  lest,  in  their  attempts  to  force 
upon  Christendom  their  private  interpretations  of  pro- 
phecy, they  only  succeed  in  bringing  all  prophecy  into 
suspicion  and  contempt.^ 

SECTION  VI. 

THE    SECOND    BEAST    AND    THE    FALSE    PROPHET. 

But  if  Nero  be  the  Wild  Beast  from  the  sea,  who 
is  the  Wild  Beast  from  the  land  ?  If  Nero  be,  in  the 
parallel  passages,  the  death-wounded  yet  unslain  head  of 
the  Beast,  who  is  the  False  Prophet  which  wrought  the 
signs  before  him  ? 

Our  great  difficulty  in  answering  this  question  rises 

1  See  infra,  pp.  315,  316. 

^  See  some  wise  remarks  of  Ewald,  Johann.  Schrift.  ii.  15. 


302  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

from  the  fact  that  not  the  lightest  breath  of  tradition 
upon  the  subject  has  been  preserved  in  the  first  two 
centuries.  The  earliest  suggestion  is  furnished  by 
Victorinus  at  the  close  of  the  third.  All  commentators 
alike,  Pra^terist,  Futurist,  Continuous-Historical,  and 
Allegorical,  with  all  their  subdivisions,  have  here  been 
reduced  to  manifest  perplexity,  and  have  been  forced  to 
content  themselves  with  explanations  which  do  violence 
to  one  or  more  of  the  indications  by  which  we  must 
be  guided. 

What  are  those  indications  ? 

The}'-  are  mainly  given  in  Rev.  xiii.  11 — 17,  and  are  as 

follows  : — 

1.  I  saw  another  wild  beast  coming  up  out  of  the 
earth. 

2.  And  he  had  two  horns  like  unto  a  lamb. 

3.  And  he  spake  as  a  dragon. 

4.  And  he  exercised  all  the  authority  of  the  first 
Beast  in  his  sight. 

5.  And  he  maketh  the  earth  to  worship  the  first 
Beast  whose  death-stroke  was  healed. 

6.  And  he  doeth  great  signs  which  it  was  given  him 
to  do  in  the  sight  of  the  Beast,  that  he  should  even 
make  fire  to  come  down  from  heaven  upon  the  earth 
by  reason  of  the  signs  which  it  was  given  him  to  do 
in  the  sight  of  the  Beast,  saying  to  them  that  dwell 
on  the  earth  that  they  should  make  an  image  to 
the  Beast  who  hath  the  stroke  of  the  sword  and 
lived. 

7.  He  gives  breath  to  the  image  of  the  Beast,  and 
makes  it  speak. 

8.  He  causes  the  execution  of  those  who  will  not 
worship  the  image  of  the  Beast. 


THE   SECOND    WILD  BEAST.  303 

9.  He  makes  men  of  all  ranks  and  classes  receive 
a  stamp  on  their  right  hand  or  their  forehead. 

10.  He  prevents  all  who  have  not  the  mark  of  the 
Beast  (his  name  and  the  number  of  his  name)  from 
buying  and  selling. 

The  only  additional  clue  is  that  in  the  parallel  des- 
cription of  liev.  xix.  20  he  is  described  under  another 
aspect  as  "  the  False  Prophet  that  wrought  the  signs 
in  the  sight  of  the  Beast  wherewith  he  deceived  those 
that  had  received  his  mark  and  worshipped  his  image." 

Now  in  trying  to  discover  the  meaning  of  the  symbol, 
we  may  again  pass  over  the  countless  idle  guesses  of 
those  who  have  endeavoured  to  torture  the  Apocalypse 
into  a  prediction  of  the  details  of  all  subsequent 
Christian  history.  With  these  guesses  we  are  not 
concerned.  They  have,  as  a  rule,  only  been  adopted  by 
the  individual  commentators  who  suggested  them. 
Nothing,  we  may  be  sure,  was  further  from  the  mind 
of  the  writer  than  a  desire  to  gratify  the  fantastic 
curiosity  of  eighteen  centuries  of  Christians  as  to  events 
yet  future  which  they  have  been  always  unable  to 
foresee,  or  even  subsequently  to  recognise.  The  resem- 
blance of  Nero  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes  as  the  personi- 
fication of  savage  enmity  to  the  people  of  Grod  in  the 
book  of  Daniel,  is  enough  to  suggest  the  certainty 
that  in  the  case  of  the  second  Beast,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  first,  the  seer  has  primarily  in  view  some  con- 
temporary person  or  phenomenon. 

Setting  aside  many  conjectures,  which  I  have  fully 
examined  elsewhere,^  that  the  second  Beast  is  meant 
for  Balbillus  of  Ephesus,  or  Tiberius  Alexander,  or 
Josephus,    or    Gessius    Florus,   three  conjectures  alone 

^  In  the  Expositor,  for  Sept.  1881. 


304  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

seem  to  me  to  be  worthy  of  special  considera- 
tion :  — 

I.  One  is  suggested  by  Victorinus  of  Pettau 
(a.d.  303).  He  thinks  that  by  this  Wild  Beast  and 
False  Prophet  is  meant  the  Roman  Augurial  system. 

There  is  in  this  suggestion  much  probability,  and 
we  may  point  out  in  passing  that  Victorinus  in  the 
third  century,  no  less  than  Irenseus  in  the  second,  saw 
that  the  Apocal3^pse  moved  in  the  plane  of  contem- 
porary events.  The  early  mention  of  this  solution  may 
have  been  due  to  some  echo  of  still  more  ancient  tradi- 
tion. Certain  it  is  that,  in  appearing  to  identify  the 
second  Beast  with  the  "False  Prophet"  (xvi.  13;  xix.  20; 
XX.  10),  St.  John  lends  some  sanction  to  this  view.  The 
influence  exercised  by  Chaldaans,  Mathematici,  Astrologers, 
Magi,  Augurs,  Medici,  Prophets,  Casters  of  Horoscopes, 
Sorcerers,  Bream-interpreters,  Sibgllists^ — Oriental  char- 
latans of  every  description,  from  Apollonius  of  Tyana 
and  Alexander  of  Abonoteichos  down  to  Peregrinus — 
is  a  phenomenon  which  constantly  meets  us  in  the  Age 
of  the  Ca}sars.  They  appeared  in  Pome  more  than 
two  centuries  before  Christ.  Ennius  mentions  them 
with  contempt.^  As  early  as  B.C.  139,  they  had  been 
ordered  to  quit  Italy  in  ten  days.  In  b.c.  33  they  had 
again  been  banished  by  the  iEdile  M.  Agrippa.  Augus- 
tus and  Tiberius  had  also  directed  severe  edicts  against 
them.^  But  they  held  their  ground."^  Tacitus  calls  the 
edict  of  Claudius   "  severe   and   ineflectual."     We  see, 

^  2i/3uA.Ai(rTa/.  Plutarch,  Marius,  42.  See  Tac.  Ann.  xii.  52 ;  IRst.  i. 
22 ;  ii.  62 ;  Suet.  Tib.  36,  Vitell.  14 ;  Juv.  Sat.  vi.  542. 

s  Cic.  De  Div.  i.  58. 

3  See  Till.  Max.  i.  3 ;  Diou  Cass.  xlix.  1 ;  Tac.  Ann.  ii.  27,  32 ;  iii.  22  ; 
iv.  58 ;  vi.  20. 

*  Tac.  Ann.  xii.  52. 


AUGURIAL  SYSTEM.  305 

both  from  Tacitus  and  from  the  anecdotage  of  Suetonius, 
that  ahnost  every  Emperor  felt  and  indulged  in  some 
curiosity  about  these  divinations.  Tiberius  reckoned 
the  "  Chaldsean  "  Thrasyllus  among  his  intimate 
friends/  Poppaea,  the  wife  of  Nero,  had  "many"  of 
them  in  her  household.^  Nero  had  his  Balbillus;'* 
Otho  his  Ptolomseus;*  Vespasian  his  Seleucus  ;^  Dpmi- 
tian  his  Ascletarion.^  Agrippina  depended  on  Chaldaeans 
for  the  favourable  hour  of  Nero's  usurpation.''  There  is 
scarcely  one  of  all  the  Emperors  whose  history  had  not 
some  connexion  or  other  with  auguries,  prophecies,  and 
dreams.^  In  the  reign  of  Nero  these  prognosticators  were 
brought  into  special  prominence,^  because  the  restless 
and  tortured  conscience  of  the  Antichrist  was  con- 
stantly seeking  to  pry  into  futurity.  It  is  remarkable 
that  they  especially  encouraged  his  Oriental  dreams, 
and  that  some  of  them  even  went  as  far  as  to  promise 
him  the  empire  of  Jerusalem. 

It  has,  however,  been  generally  felt  that  the  in- 
stitution of  Prophets  was  not  so  prominent  even  in 
Nero's  reign  as  to  admit  of  our  applying  to  it  the  ten 
definite  indications  of  the  Apocalyptic  seer.  False 
prophets  were  hardly  in  any  sense  a  delegate  and  alter 
ego  of  the  Emperor.  There  is  at  least  a  probability 
that  as  one  person  is  specially  pointed  to  by  the  symbol 
of  the  Beast,  so  one  person  is  intended  by  his  False 
Prophet. 

^  Tac.  Ann.  vi.  21. 

'  Tac.  Hist.  i.  22.  ^  guet.  'Nero,  36. 

*  Suet.  Otho,  4 ;  Tac.  Hist.  i.  22,  23. 

^  Tac.  Hist.  ii.  8.  "  Suet.  Bomit.  15.  ''  Tac.  Ann.  xii.  68. 

«  Suet.  Jul.  Caesar,  vii.  61 ;   Odav.  94  ;   Tiber.  16;   Calig.  57  ;   Otho,  4; 
Titus,  ii.  9 ;  Domit.  xiv.  16.     For  Nero,  see  Tac.  Ann.  xiv.  9. 
»  Suet.  Ner.  34,  36,  40.     Plin.  H.  N.  xxx.  2. 

U 


306  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

II.  More,  on  the  whole,  is  to  be  said  in  favour  of 
the  view  that  the  Second  Beast,  or  False  Prophet, 
is  Simon  Magus.  In  one  direction  he  corresponds 
with  remarkable  closeness  to  the  symbols.  His  bap- 
tism gave  him  a  certain  lamb-like  semblance  to  Chris- 
tianity, while  his  gross  deceptions  were  the  voice 
of  the  serpent.  Christian  tradition,  which  may  well 
be  founded  on  facts,  has  much  to  say  about  his 
pretended  miracles,  and  two  classes  of  those  miracles 
are  of  the  very  character  here  indicated.  It  is 
said,  for  instance,  that  the  Second  Beast  makes  fire 
come  down  upon  the  earth.  Now  among  the  miracles 
of  Simon  we  are  told  that  one  was  to  appear  clothed 
in  flame. ^  It  is  said  that  the  Second  Beast  animates 
an  image  of  the  Beast,  and  Simon  is  expressly  said  to 
have  made  statues  move,  so  that  he  may  well  have 
also  pretended  to  make  them  speak.^  If  he  attempted 
this  imposture  at  all  he  is  more  likely  to  have  applied 
it  to  the  statue  of  the  Emperor — "the  image  of 
the  Beast " — than  to  any  other.  All  that  would  have 
been  needed  was  a  little  machinery  and  a  little  ven- 
triloquism. If  the  Middle  Ages  were  deceived  b}^  wink- 
ing Madonnas  and  glaring  crucifixes  it  must  have  been 
equally  easy  to  delude  the  Eoman  mob  by  moving 
statues.  Further,  it  was  at  Eome  that  Simon  dis- 
played his  magic  powers,  and  they  are  said  to  have 
been  exercised  with  the  immediate  object  of  winning 
influence  over  Nero.  In  this  the  legend  declares  that 
he    entirely   succeeded,  and    that    his    influence    was 

'  Arnobius  {Adv.  Gent.  ii.  12)  speaks  of  Siiuou  being  precipitated  from 
a  fiery  chariot.  Augustiuo  [Hacr.  i.)  says  that  lie  professed  to  liavo  come 
to  the  Apostles  iu  fiery  touguos.  Nicephorus  says  that  lie  pretended  to 
pass  through  fire  unhurt. 

^  Clem.  Recogn.  iii.  47.     "  I  have  made  statues  move  about." 


SIMON   MAGUS.  307 

wielded  to  induce  the  Emperor  to  persecute  and 
massacre  the  Christians.  These  features  appear  not  in 
one,  but  in  many  authors/  and  though  the  sources  from 
which  we  now  derive  this  information  are  exceedingly 
dubious,  there  is  nothing  improbable  in  the  supposition 
that  Simon  Magus  did  find  his  way  to  Eome — the 
reservoir,  as  Tacitus  says,  into  which  all  things  in- 
famous and  shameful  flowed^ — and  did  there  endeavour 
to  win  dupes  by  the  same  magical  arts  which  had 
gained  him  so  many  votaries  among  the  simple  Samari- 
tans.^ If  we  suppose  that  he  dazzled  the  mind  of 
Nero,  and  that  he  was  one  of  those  men  of  Jewish 
race,  who,  with  Aliturus  and  Josephus,  taught  Nero 
and  his  servants  to  discriminate  between  Jew^s  and 
Christians,  and  to  martyr  the  latter  while  they 
honoured  the  former,  then  in  Simon  Magus  the  Second 
Beast  of  the  Apocalypse — especially  in  the  attri- 
butes of  a  False  Prophet — would  stand  revealed.  It 
is  true  that  the  Pagan  historians  are  silent  about 
him  and  his  doings ;  but  the  events  themselves 
had  no  political  significance,  and  lay  outside  their 
sphere.  They  belong  to  the  history  of  the  Church 
not  of  the  State. ^  And  Yictorinus  seems  to  be  re- 
ferring to  Simon   Magus  when,  with  reference  to  the 

^  Justin  Mart.  Apol.  ii.  p.  69 ;  Tertull.  De  Anim.  34 ;  X>e  Fraescr. 
Haer.  37;  Snip.  Sev.  Hist.  Sacr.  ii.  42;  Clem.  Ho  in.  ii.  34;  iv.  4;  Becogn. 
ii.  9 ;  iii.  47,  57  ;  Constt.  Apost.  vi.  9  ;  Epipliau.  Haer.  xxi.  5 ;  Arnob. 
Adv.  Gentes,  ii.  12  ;  Ambros.  Hexaem.  iv.  8,  §  33  ;  Cyrill.  Catech.  6 ;  Ps. 
Egesipp.  De  excidio  Hieros. ;  August.  Serm.  iii.  de  SS.  Petro  et  Paulo  ; 
Nicephorus  Callistus,  H.  E.  ii.  27. 

2  Tac.  Ann.  xv.  46 ;  v.  supra,  vol.  i.  p.  116. 

^  Acts  viii.  11. 

*  I  have  already  mentioned  that  Justin's  mistake  about  a  statue  to  liim 
as  a  god  was  dispelled  in  1574,  when  the  inscription  to  the  Sabine  god, 
Semo  Sancus  was  found  in  the  place  which  lie  mentions ;  v.  supra,  vol.  i. 
p.  115. 

U    2 


308  THE   EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

signs  wrought  by  the  False  Prophet,  he  says  that  "  the 
Magi  do  these  things  even  to  this  day  by  the  help 
of  the  banished  Angels." 

III.  We  now  pass  from  what  may  be  called  the 
ecclesiastical  and  the  religious  fields  of  conjecture  to  the 
political.  It  must  be  remembered  that  it  is  as  it 
were  only  by  an  afterthought  that  the  Second  Beast 
is  called  the  False  Prophet.  May  we  not  look  for  him 
in  another  region  of  Poman  life  ? 

There  is,  I  think,  much  to  be  said  in  favour  of 
Hildebrandt's  suggestion^  that  by  the  False  Prophet, 
or  the  **  Second  Beast  from  the  land,."  is  meant  Vespasian. 
Let  us  apply  to  him  the  ten  indications  which  the  seer 
has  furnished. 

1.  Being  a  "  wild  beast''  it  is  a  priori  probable  that 
he  will  belong  to  the  heathen  world.  He  rises  "  from 
the  earth  "  or  "from  the  land."  If  we  take  the  former 
rendering  it  may  point  to  his  taking  his  origin,  as  an 
important  power,  not  from  the  sea,  or  any  sea-washed 
peninsula  like  Italy,  whence  Nero  had  sprung,  but  from 
the  vast  continent  of  Asia ;  i.e.,  the  growth  of  his 
power  is  connected  with  the  East.  If  the  words  be 
rendered  ''from  the  land''  they  then  apply  to  Judaea. 
Now  both  Jews^  and  Pagans^  were  struck  with  the 
fact  that  Vespasian,  as  Emperor,  "  went  forth  from 
Juda3a,"  and  they  connected  his  rise  in  that  country 
with  many  prophecies  then  current,  not  only  in  the 
East,  but  among  the  Pomans  themselves — prophecies 
which  were  familiar  to  more  than  one  of  the  Caesars, 
and  had  exercised  no  small  influence  on  their  aims  and 
actions. 

1  Hilgenfold's  Zeitschr.  1874. 

2  Jos.  B.  J.  vi.  5,  §  4.  3  Suet.  Vesp.  6. 


VESPASIAN.  309 

2.  He  had  two  horns  like  unto  a  lamb.  There  is 
hardly  one  of  those  who  have  been  suggested  as  answer- 
ing to  the  False  Prophet  to  whom  this  description  in 
any  wa}^  applies.  To  Vespasian  it  does  appl}'-  in  a 
remarkable  manner.  His  nature  and  his  language,  as 
compared  with  those  of  a  Caligula  and  a  Nero,  were 
absolutely  mild.  He  was  indeed  as  indifferent  to  the 
blood  and  misery  of  a  hostile  people  as  all  the  Eomans 
were  ;  but  there  was  nothing  naturally  ferocious  and  san- 
guinary in  the  character  of  this  worthy  bourgeois.^  ISTovv 
since  the  ten  horns  of  the  first  Beast  are  ten  provincial 
governors — ten  powers  which  are,  jDrimarily,  a  source  of 
his  strength — we  should  expect  that  the  tioo  honis  also 
indicated  persons,  and  especially  persons  more  or  less 
imperial  in  their  functions,  in  whose  existence  lay  the 
strength  of  the  Lamb-like  Beast.  And  this  was  the 
exact  position  of  Vespasian.     His  force  lay  in  the  fact 

^  Josephus  boasts  of  the  generosity  of  Yespasian  as  something  extra- 
ordinary {Antt.  xii.  3,  §  2).  His  natural  kindness,  and  freedom  from 
hatred  and  revenge,  are  freely  admitted,  and  may  account  for  his  external 
semblance  to  "  a  lamb  "  in  the  Apocalyptic  symbol.  Suetonius  says  that 
from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  his  reign  he  was  "  civilis  et  clemens  " 
( Vesp.  11) ;  that  he  bore  all  kinds  of  opposition  in  the  gentlest  manner 
(lenissvme,  c.  13) ;  and  that  he  neither  remembered  nor  revenged  injuries 
(c.  14).  But  St.  John,  a  Jew  by  birth  and  a  true  patriot,  saw  with  Jewish 
eyes  the  inner  wild- beast  nature  of  the  man.  He  would  be  little  likely 
to  share  in  the  renegade  admiration  of  Josephus  for  the  general  who, 
like  his  son,  caused  such  myriads  of  Jews — 

"  To  sweU,  slow  by  the  car's  tall  side, 
The  stoic  tyrant's  philosophic  pride  ; 
To  flesh  the  lion's  ravenous  jaws,  and  feel 
The  sportive  fury  of  the  fencer's  steel ; 
Or  sigh,  deep-plunged  beneath  the  sultry  mine, 
For  the  light  airs  of  balmy  Palestine." 

St.  John's  estimate  of  him  is  that  of  the  Rabbis,  wlio  narrated  that  he 
died  in  frightful  torments ;  and  that  of  the  2nd  book  of  Esdras,  that  he 
ruled  "  with  much  oppression  "  (2  Esdr.  xi.  32). 


310  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

that  he  had  two  fio//s\  both  of  them  men  of  mark :  Titus, 
the  conqueror  of  Juda?a,  who  kept  the  allegiance  of  the 
army  firm  for  him  while  he  was  awaiting  his  actual 
accession  to  power ;  Domitian,  who  headed  his  party 
in  Rome.  But  for  their  assistance  his  cause  could 
not  have  prospered  so  decisively,  and  both  of  them 
succeeded  to  the  empire  after  his  death. ^ 

3.  lie  spake  as  a  dragon  or  serpent,  that  is,  he  used 
the  language  generically  of  Paganism,  and  specifically 
of  subtle  and  deceptive  intention.  The  allusion  may 
be  to  circumstances  which  were  better  known  to  St. 
John  than  to  us ;  but  meanwhile,  whether  it  be  generic 
or  specific,  there  is  sufficient  evidence  that  it  is  appro- 
priate in  a  sketch  of  the  rise  of  Vespasian,  and 
corresponds  with  tbe  serpentine  wisdom  and  caution 
with  which  his  designs  were  carried  out. 

4.  He  is  a  visible  delegate  of,  and  responsible  to, 
the  first  Beast.  This  applies  better  to  Vespasian  than 
to  any  one.  The  first  outbreak  of  the  Jewish  war  took 
place  while  Nero  was  indulging  in  his  frantic  follies  of 
aestheticism  in  Greece,  a.d.  QQ.  He  instantly  des- 
patched Vespasian  to  suppress  the  rebellion.  To  a 
general  so  placed  it  would  have  been  an  easy  matter 
to  revolt  against  the  blood-stained  actor  who  then 
afflicted  the  world.  But  as  long  as  the  Emperor  lived, 
Vespasian,  though  not  a  favourite  of  Nero,  remained 
conspicuously  faithful. 

5.  And  he  made  the  earth  worship  the  first  Beast, 
whose  death-stroke  was  healed.  To  enforce  subjection 
to  Nero,  who  even  in  his  lifetime  was  "  worshipped  "  as 

1  Titus  and  Domitian  are  probably  tlie  two  heads  on  each  side  of  the 
central  head  of  the  eagle  in  2  Esdr.  xi.  30,  and  ver.  35  may  allude  to  tlio 
belief  that  Domitian  poisoned  Titus. 


VESPASIAN'S   "MIRACLES."  311 

a  god,  was  the  express  object  of  Vespasian's  mission  to 
the  East.  Moreover,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  by 
the  Wild  Beast  is  meant  the  Roman  Empire  in  general 
as  well  as  Nero  ;  and  Rome  was  worshipped  as  a  goddess 
in  many  of  the  provinces.^ 

6.  It  might  seem  an  impossibility  that  any  Roman 
general  should  have  pretended  to  loork  signs,  still  more 
that  there  could  be  anything  in  his  history  which  could  be 
specifically  described  as  a  bringing  down  fire  from  heaven. 
It  happens,  however,  that  Vespasian  is  the  one  Roman — 
the  only  Roman  in  high  places,  the  only  Imperial  dele- 
gate— to  whom  such  language  will  apply.  His  visit  to 
Alexa7idria  was  accompanied  hy  signs  and  wonders  which 
obtained  wide  credence.  Not  only  had  the  Nile  risen 
in  a  single  day  higher  than  it  had  ever  done  before, 
but  Vespasian  was  believed  to  have  worked  personal 
miracles.^  He  had  anointed  with  spittle  the  eyes  of  a 
blind  man,  and  restored  his  sight ;  before  a  full 
assembly  he  had  healed  a  cripple ;  and  he  had  shown 
a  remarkable  example  of  second  sight. ^  We  do  not, 
indeed,  read  that  he  had  called  down  fire  from  heaven ; 
but  that  expression  may  be  metaphorical  of  the 
fire  and  sword  with  which  he  scathed  and  devastated 
Palestine,  and  we  can  see  the  circumstance  which  may 
have  given  shape  to  the  image.  It  represents  the 
False  Prophet  as  a  pseudo-Elias,  and  there  was  a  cir- 
cumstance which  might  well  have  suggested  a  sort  of 
antithesis  between  the  two.  Vespasian  had  visited 
Carmel,  and  had  received   a   remarkable  communication 

^  On  the  apotheosis  of  Emperors,  often  even  in  their  lifetime,  see 
Sueton.  Octav.  59;  Tiber.  40;  Claud.  2;  Galig.  22,  24;  Ves'p.  9;  Tac. 
Ann.  i.  10,  74;  iv.  15,  37  ;  xiv.  31,  etc.,  and  supra,  vol.  i.  p.  6. 

2  Dion  Cass.  Ixvi.  8 ;  Suet.  Vesp.  7.  ^  Tac.  Hist.  iv.  82. 


312  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

from  "  the  god  Carmelus "  (evidently  intended  for 
Elijah),-^  who,  though  not  worshipped  under  the  form  of 
any  image,  had  there  an  altar  which  was  regarded  as 
peculiarly  sacred.  This  god  Carmelus  had  given  him  an 
oracle,  which,  even  in  the  version  of  Suetonius,  reminds 
us  strongly  of  Dan.  xi.  3G,  namely,  that  "  everything 
which  he  had  in  his  mind  should  prosper,  however  great 
it  was.'"^  As  a  "  fidmoi  belli,"  and  as  the  supposed  re- 
cipient of  a  favourable  oracle  from  Elijah,  Vespasian,  in 
his  brilliant  successes  at  the  beginning  of  the  Jewish 
war,  might  well  be  said,  in  the  style  of  writing  which 
constantly  intermingles  the  symbolic  and  the  literal,  to 
have  flashed  fire  from  heaven  upon  the  enemies  of  the 
Beast. 

7.  He  (jives  breath  to  the  image  of  the  Beast  and  makes 
it  speak.  Whether  in  this  instance  again  we  have  some 
allusion  to  the  story  of  a  magic  wonder  current  in  that 
day  we  cannot  tell.  All  that  we  know  is  that  Ves- 
pasian would  certainly  enforce  homage  and  reverence 
from  the  conquered  Jews  to  the  statues  of  the  Em- 
peror,^ which  Nero  was  specially  fond  of  multiplying, 
and  which  the  Jews  regarded  with  peculiar  abhor- 
rence.^ In  the  Ascension  of  Isaiah  it  is  made  a  cha- 
racteristic of  Nero  that  "  he  shall  erect  his  statue 
in  all  cities  before  his  face."^  Since  Simon  Magus 
pretended  to  animate  statues  with  life,  there  may  have 
been  a  rumour  that  something  of  the  kind  had  taken 
place  in  Judaea.     If  not,  the  metaphorical  meaning — 

'  Ritter,  Erdkunde,  viii.  705.     Carmel  is  now  called  Mar  Elyas. 
»  Suet.  Vesp.  5  ;  Tac.  Hist.  ii.  78. 
^  Jos.  Antt.  xviii.  8,  §  1. 

*  "  The  image  of  the  beast  is  clearly  tlie  statue  of  tlio  Emperor." — 
Mihnan. 

^  Ascens.  Isa.  iv.  11;  Lactaut.  ii.  7. 


DOINGS   OF   YESPASIAN.  313 

tlie  reanimation  of  tlie  Roman  power  in  Palestine, 
which  the  successful  revolt  of  the  Jews  had  for  a  time 
extinguished — is  quite  sufficient  to  meet  the  language 
of  the  seer. 

8.  The  putting  to  death  of  those  who  will  not  ivorship 
the  image  of  the  Beast : — the  slaughter,  hanishment, 
and  sale  into  slavery,  of  all  who  refused  to  accept  the 
imperial  authority,  reverence  the  imperial  images,  and 
accept  the  imperial  coinage,  is  a  circumstance  which 
will  explain  itself.  It  is  a  symbolic  condensation  of  all 
that  had  already  occurred  in  the  Jewish  war  at  Ascalon, 
at  Sepphoris,  at  Gadara,  at  Jotapata,  at  Grerasa,  at 
Japha,  Joppa,  Tarichese,  Giscala,  Gamala,  and  through- 
out the  whole  north  and  west  of  Palestine. 

9.  He  stamps  men  of  all  ranks  and  classes,  high  and 
low,  rich  and  poor,  with  the  image  of  his  Beast,  and  the 
number  of  his  name.  This  detail,  which  only  applies 
in  the  loosest  possible  manner  to  any  of  the  others 
who  have  been  regarded  as  the  antitypes  of  the  False 
Prophet,  suits  Vespasian  very  closely.  It  exactly  de- 
scribes his  natural  conduct  in  giving  his  soldiers  the 
brand  of  their  service,^  and  exacting  from  all  classes 
the  oath  of  allegiance,  making  them  swear  "by  the 
genius  of  Csesar  " — first  of  Nero,  then  of  Galba. 

Lastly,  10.  The  forhidding  all  to  huy  and  sell  icho 
have  not  got  the  in  ark  of  the  Beast,  seems  to  be  a  very 
natural  reminiscence  of  one  of  Vespasian's  most  re- 
markable acts.  When  Nero  was  dead,  and  Galba 
murdered,  and  Otho  also  had  committed  suicide  after 
the  terrible  battle  of  Bedriacum,  neither  Vespasian 
nor  his  soldiers  felt  inclined  to  obey  the  imbecile  rule 
of  the  glutton  Vitellius.     Vespasian  accepted  his  own 

^  See  Ronsch,  Das  N.  T.  Tertullians,.i\  702. 


nU  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

nomination  to  tho  Empiiv  bv  tbo  loirions  of  ^[uoianns 
as  well  as  by  bis  own  soKliors.  and  bo  bastoned  to  make 
binisoU*  niastor  of  tbo  occasion  bv  ostablisbinLT  bis  boad- 
quartors  at  Abwandria.  Any  ndor  wbo  bad  bobl  of 
AU^xaiidria  oonUl  oon\n\and  tbo  aUoi^ianoo  of  Kijfypt.  and 
tbc  lord  of  Ki^vpt  oouKl  alwavs  put  bis  band  upon  tbo 
very  tbroat  of  l\on\o.  For  if  tbo  corn  sbips  did  not 
sail  frvMn  Ab^xandria  tbo  popnbioo  of  Komo  was  starved. 
Aooordingly,  tbo  tirst  tbin^-  wbiob  Vospasian  did  was  to 
forbid  all  exporU'  from  Ab'xandria.  Tbat  storn  odiot 
was  felt  tbnnii^bout  tbo  Empin\  Tbo  object  of  it 
was  to  starve  Komo  into  an  absohito  aoooptanoo  of  bis 
"  mark  of  tbo  Boast."  i.e.,  bis  imperial  olain\.  It  was 
entiri^ly  sueeessfnl.  Galba,  Otbo,  and  ovon  Vitellins, 
wore  r^^LT'irdod  as  isolated  military  nsnrpers ;  Vespasian, 
tbo  Wild  Boast's  delegate,  tbo  Wild  Boast's  miraculous 
npbolder.  mounted  tbo  Wild  Boast's  tbrono.  and  like 
bim  became  one  of  tbo  seven  beads,  and  wielded  tbo 
power  of  tbo  ton  provincial  borns — imico  rebellious — 
now  subdued :  often  inimical  to  tbe  barlot-oitv,  but 
always  t'aitbful  to  tbe  Boman  Empire.^ 

To  me  tbese  circumstances,  wbicb  I  bavo  drawn 
out  in  my  own  way.  but  of  wbicb  tbo  oriixinal  dis- 
covery is  duo  to  llildebraudt,  seem  to  be  nearly 
dtvisive.  My  only  doubt  is  wbotber.  in  tbat  subtle 
intorcban^e  of  ideas  wbicb  marks  all  symbolic  litera- 
tuivs.  St.  Jolui  tuny  not  have  miNQleti  firo  eiynct^pfioMS  in 
bis  description  of  tbe  Second  Beast.  If  so.  I  sbould 
feci  no  doubt  tbat  tbe  subordinate  monster  was  meant 
to  cowdiMe  the  featurt^s  observable  in  tbe  position  and 
conduct  of  Simon  ^Nla^fus,  as  tbe  False  Bropbet  and 
Impostor  wbo  supjx^rted  Xerv^  at  Rome,  and  of  Josepbus 
'  Rov.  x^-ii.  12.  la  16.  IT. 


A  OOXPOSITE  STMBOLl  3U 

the  Fabse  Prophet  who  embraced  the  csuue  of  Yespasiati 
in  Palestine,  with  that  of  Vespasian  himself  a«  a  two- 
horned  Wild  Bea«t  maintaining  the  power  of  Home  in 
the  Holy  Land,  The  composite  character  of  irach  a 
s3'mbol  presents  no  difficnltj.  It  closely  corresponds 
with  known  apocalyptic  methods; — and  certainly  in 
this  instance  if  the  Second  Wild  Beast  and  False  Pro- 
phet be  regarded  as  a  composite  symbol  (as  is  suggested 
by  the  alternative  descriptionj,  I  think  that  I  hare  here 
offered  a  closer  approximation  to  erery  one  of  the  re- 
quirements of  the  imagery  than  I  have  found  in  the 
pages  of  any  other  interpreter. 

Lastly,  to  revert  for  one  moment  to  the  return  of 
the  Antichrist  in  the  person  of  Xero,  it  is — as  I  have 
said — in  apocalyptic  and  Oriental  style  amply  fulfilled 
in  the  reign  of  Domitian.  If  Galba,  Otho,  and  Vitellins 
be  omitted  from  the  list  as  mere  transitory  usurpers  who 
would  hardly  be  regarded  as  Emperors  at  all,  then  Xero 
the  fifth  Emperor  did  reappear,  fujt  indeed  in  pernon^  hut  in 
fsynJjfjl,  in  the  eighth  Emperor,  Domitian.^  Even  Titus 
was  regarded  as  likely  to  be  a  coming  Xero.*  The 
Jews  were  very  far  fixmi  looking  upon  him  as  the 
amor  et  deliciae  hmmani  ^enervs.  It  is  probable  that 
Sulpicius  Sererus  may  be  preserving  for  us  the  testi- 
mony of  Tarntus  when  (iL  97)  he  attributes  to  Titus  the 
thoroughly  Xeronian  and  Antiehristian  purpose  of 
uprooting  both  Christianity  and  Judaism  in  one  and  the 
same  stroke.  This  purpose,  if  he  ever  had  it,  he  did 
not  live  to  carry  out.     But  Domitian,  at  any  rate,  was, 

>  TBat  'E&gkt  waaid  tiMn  be  Augustas,  Tlbans,  Gaiiis,  damXam,  STeto, 
Teqnaaa,  Tifais,  STeto  again  ia  tibe  form  of  Doaiiiiaa;  so  ^ui  Sero  mm, 
and  is  not,  and  jet  was  to  xeear:  ke  w  at  oaee  tibe  fifili  aad  Ae  c^UIl 

(SueLTiLT). 


316  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

like  Nero,  an  open  persecutor  of  Christianity,  Tertullian 
not  only  sets  him  side  by  side  with  Nero,  but  even  calls 
him  "a  fragment  of  Nero,  as  far  as  his  cruelty  was  con- 
cerned," and  a  sub-Nero.^  In  Domitian  the  Christians 
saw  the  legend  of  Nero  rcdivivns  symbolically  and  effec- 
tively if  not  literally  fulfilled. 

So  great  was  the  resemblance  between  him  and  his 
blood-stained  prototype  that  the  common  nickname  of 
Domitian  in  Home  was  "///<?  bald  Nero."  "Titus,"  says 
Ausonius,  "  was  fortunate  in  the  shortness  of  his  rule  : 
his  brother  followed  him,  whom  his  Rome  called  '  a 
bald  Nero;'""  and  Juvenal  talks  of  the  time  Avlien  "  the 
last  Flavins  was  rending  the  half-dead  world,  and  Rome 
was  enslaved  to  iJie  bald  Nero."^  The  identification  of 
the  spirit  of  Domitian  with  that  of  Nero  was  also  familiar 
to  Christian  historians.  Eusebius  says  that  towards 
the  close  of  his  reign  Domitian  estabHshed  himself  as 
a  successor  of  Nero's  hatred  to  God  and  hostility 
against  Him.*  It  was  natural  to  St.  John  to  symbolise 
Nero  as  "  the  AVild  Beast,"  and  the  very  same  term 
{immanissima  bellaa)  is  applied  by  Pliny  to  Domitian.^ 
Tacitus  even  draws  a  parallel  between  the  two  to  the 
advantage  of  Nero.^  Both  showed  the  wild  beast 
nature,  but  the  ferocity  of  Domitian  was  more  cruel 
and  more  innate.  In  him  the  death-wounded  Antichrist 
was  once  more  restored  to  life. 


1  Tert.  A'pol.  5  ;  De  Vail.  4. 

2  Auson.  Monost.  de  Ord.  XII.  Imp.  11,  12. 

3  Juv.  Sai.  iv.  34,  35. 

*  TeKevTui'  ttjs  'Nepcuuos  6eoex^P^°'^  '''*  ""^  Oeofiaxlas  SidSoxov  favT6y  KUTfff- 
T-fiaaro  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  17). 

^  Paneg.  48. 

^  Tac.  Agric.  45  :  "  Nero  taiuen  Bubtraxit  oculos,  jussitque  scelora  nou 
apectavit." 


THE  VIALS.  317 

SECTION  VIL 

THE    VIALS. 

We  liave  now  passed  in  review  all  the  more  difficult 
Apocalj^ptic  visions.     A  great  part  of  the  remainder  of 
the  Book  is  occupied  with  scenes  which  require  hut  little 
comment,  and  convey  directly  their  own  great  lessons. 
First,  we  have  the  glorious  vision  of  the  Lamb  upon 
Mount  Zion  with  the  redeemed  and  virgin  multitude. 
Then  three  Angels  fly  in  rapid  succession  through  the 
mid  region   of   heaven.     The    first  bears  in  his  hand 
an  eternal   gospel  which  must  be  preached   to    every 
nation,  tribe,  tongue,  and  people  before  the  End.^     The 
second    cries    out   in    prophetic    anticipation,    "  Fallen, 
fallen  is  Babylon  the  Great."     A  third  utters  an  awful 
warning  to  the   Gentiles  who  worship  the   Beast  and 
receive  his  mark.     Then  a  Voice  proclaims  the  blessed- 
ness of  the  dead  who  die  in  the  Lord  from  henceforth, 
and  immediately  afterwards   there  appears  on  a  white 
cloud  one  like  unto  the  Son  of  Man,  wearing  a  golden 
crown  and  grasping  a  sharp  sickle.     Then  follows  the 
harvest  of  the   elect,  and  the  vintage   of    the   wrath 
of    God,  which  seems  to  take  place  in  the  valley  of 
Jehoshaphat,^  and  of  which  the  imagery  is   tinged  by 
reminiscences   of    the    terrible   Jewish   War,   with   its 
deluge  of  rolling  blood^ — rolling  200  miles,  or,  roughly, 

1  Matt.  xxiv.  14. 

2  Rev.  xiv.  20;  Isa.  xvii.  5;  Ixiii.  1—6;  Jool  iv.  2,  11—14;  Mic. 
iv.  13 ;  Hal),  iii.  12. 

^  Isa.  Ixiii.  3;  comp.  Enocli  xcviii.3  :  "  The  horse  shall  wade  up  to  his 
breast,  and  the  chariot  shall  sink  to  his  axle  in  the  blood  of  sinners."  So 
too  Silius  Italicus  (iii.  704)  speaks  of  "  flammam  exspirare  fureutes 
cornipedes,  multoque  fluentia  sanguine  lora." 


318  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

the  whole  length  from  Tyre  to  Ehinocolura,  from  north 
to  south  of  the  Holy  Land.^ 

Then,  after  an  episode  of  resplendent  triumph  and 
thanksgiving  in  heaven,  seven  Angels,  arrayed  in  pre- 
cious stone,"  pour  out  their  vials  of  wrath  upon  the 
heathen  world. ^  Like  the  plagues  of  the  first  four 
trumpets,  they  affect  the  earth,  and  the  sea,  and  the 
rivers,'*  and  the  heavenly  bodies,  the  seat  of  the  Beast, 
and  the  River  Euphrates,  and  they  are  ended  by  the 
terrible  phenomena  of  storm  and  earthquake.  They 
are  again  but  a  vivid  picture  of  the  repeated  signs  in 
the  sun,  and  the  moon,  and  the  stars,  the  distress  of 
nations  with  perplexity,  the  sea  and  waves  roaring, 
men's  hearts  failing  them  for  fear,  and  the  shaking 
of  the  powers  of  heaven,  of  which  Christ  had  pro- 
phesied.^ At  the  outpouring  of  the  sixth  Vial,  the 
Euphrates  is  metaphorically  dried  up  to  prepare  for  the 
invasion  of  the  kings  of  the  East;  and  out  of  the 
mouths  of  the  Devil,  the  Beast,  and  the  False  Prophet 
come  three  froglike  spirits  of  demons  working  miracles 
which  gather  the  heathen  kings  to  the  great  battle  of 
Har-Magedon — a  symbol  of  satanic  opposition  gathering 
to  a  final  head,  and  meeting  with  its  final  overthrow.^ 

^  Jerome,  Ep.  ad  Bard,  states  this  at  160  miles;  but  the  deluge  of 
blood  began  to  roll  from  a  point  far  north  of  Tyre. 

^  Leg.  Ai'Soi',  A,  C,  Vulg.,  and  some  MSS.  known  to  Andreas.  Comp. 
Ezek.  xxviii.  13  {■ndi'Ta  xiQov  xpv^t^v  eVSe'Seerai),  "Every  precious  stone 
was  thy  covering"  (see  Westcott  and  Hort,  Greeh  Test.  ii.  ad  loc,  and 
compare  Milton's—  »  g^g  vaunting  foe 

Though  huge,  and  in  a  rock  of  diamond  armed)." 

2  Ezek.  xxii.  31 ;  Zeph.  iii.  8. 

*  Comp.  Wisd.  xi.  15 — 16;  xvi.  1,  9;  xvii.  2,  seqq. 

^  Luke  xxi.  25,  26.  We  have  already  seen  that  the  practical  identity 
of  the  seals,  trumpets,  and  vials  was  known  by  tradition  even  to  the 
earliest  commentators ;  v.  snpra,  pp.  224,  231,  265. 

^  The  hill  and  plain  of  Megiddo  were  the  scenes  of  great  battles. 


JERUSALEM   AND   ROME.  319 

The  seventh  Angel  pours  out  his  vial  on  the  air. 
There  are  thunders  and  a  might}'  earthquake.  The 
great  city  (Jerusalem)  is  divided  into  three ;  the  cities 
of  the  Grentiles  fall ;  Rome — the  mystic  Babylon — 
comes  into  remembrance  before  God  for  vengeance ; 
islands  and  mountains  flee  away,  and  there  is  a  mighty 
plague  of  hail.  We  seem  here  to  be  in  a  region  beyond 
the  limits  of  history ;  but  we  can  see  that  the  images 
were  in  part  suggested  by  that  remarkable  epoch  of 
earthquakes  which  affected  especially  the  cities  of  Asia, 
and  by  the  three  camps  occupied  by  the  army  of  Titus, 
and  the  three  factions  which  occupied  the  three  regions 
of  Jerusalem — Simon  in  Bezetha,  John  in  the  Upper 
City,  Eleazar  in  the  Temple — and  tore  it  to  pieces  with 
their  internecine  fury. 

Then  the  great  harlot  city  (Rome),  drunken  with  the 
blood  of  the  Neronian  martyrs,  is  judged.  Her  judg- 
ment comes  in  part  from  the  ten  horns,  which  should 
have  been  the  source  of  her  strength,  but  which  hate 
her,  and  eat  her  flesh,  and  burn  her  with  fire.  Part 
at  least  of  the  symbol  corresponds  with  the  horrors 
inflicted  upon  Rome  and  Romans  in  the  civil  wars  by 
provincial  governors — already  symbolised  as  the  horns 
of  the  Wild  Beast,  and  here  characterised  as  kings  yet 
kingdomless.  Such  were  Galba,  Otho,  Vitellius,  and 
Vespasian.  Vespasian  and  Mucianus  deliberately  plan- 
ned to  starve  the  Roman  populace ;  ^  and  in  the  fierce 
struggle  of   the  Vitellians  against  Sabinus  and  Domi- 

They  are  in  the  Plain  of  Jezreel,  the  battle-field  of  Palestine  ( Judg.  v.  19  ; 
2  Kings  xxiii.  29 ;  Zech.  xii.  11).  Hence  Ewald's  conjecture  that  Har- 
Magedon  is  a  cypher  for  Rome  the  Great  (Ha  Romah  Haggedolah)  is 
needless.  Otherwise  we  might  see  here  another  instance  of  Gematria,  for 
Har-Magedon  and  Romah  Hagedolah  are  both  =  304. 
1  Jos.  B.  J.  iv.  10,  §  5. 


320  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

tiiin,  and  the  massacre  which  followed,  there  occurred 
the  event  which  sounded  so  portentously  in  the  ears  of 
every  Roman — the  burning  to  the  ground  of  the 
Temple  of  the  Capitoline  Jupiter,  on  December  19th, 
A.D.  69.^  It  was  not  the  least  of  the  signs  of  the 
times  that  the  space  of  one  year  saw  wrapped  in  flames 
the  two  most  hallowed  shrines  of  the  ancient  world — 
the  Temple  of  Jerusalem  and  the  Temple  of  the  great 
Latin  god.  The  Jews  were  not  alone  in  interpreting 
these  events  of  the  final  dissolution  of  the  Empire. 
Josephus  saw,  in  the  establishment  of  the  Flavian 
dynasty,  "  the  unexpected  deliverance  of  the  fortunes 
of  Eome  from  ruin ;  "^  Tacitus  looked  on  the  year  a.d. 
G8  as  one  which  threatened  to  be  the  final  year  of 
the  Roman  commonwealth.^  The  Apocalyptist  of  //. 
E'sdras  says  of  the  Eagle  in  which  he  symbolises  Rome, 
"  Thou  hast  afflicted  the  weak,  thou  hast  hurt  the 
peaceable,  thou  hast  loved  liars,  and  hast  cast  down 
walls  of  such  as  did  thee  no  harm ;  therefore  appear 
no  more,  0  Eagle !  nor  thy  horrible  wings,  nor  thy 
wicked  feathers,  nor  thy  malicious  heads,  nor  thy  hurt- 
ful claws,  nor  all  thy  vain  body."  (2  Esdr.  xi.  42 — 46.) 
The  author  of  the  Book  of  Baruch  says  of  Rome,  the 
city  which  afflicted  Jerusalem,  "  Fire  shall  come  upon 
her  from  the  Everlasting,  long  to  endure  ;  and  she  shall 
be  inhabited  of  devils  for  a  great  time  "  (Bar.  iv.  35). 
The  next  chapters  are  occupied  by  the  mingled  wail 
and  pa?an  over  the  doom  of  fallen  Babylon,  which  is 
echoed   in  heaven.'*      The  armies  of  heaven  ride  forth 

i  Tac.  JI.  iii.  83 ;  Jos.  B.  J.  iv.  11,  §  4. 

2  Jos.  B.  J.  iv.  11,  §  5.  3  Tac.  TT.  i.  11. 

*  The  expressions  tlirouglioiit  chaptci's  x\'ii. — xviii.  are  almost  entirely 
borrowed  from  the  ancient  prophets  (Isa.  xiii.,  xxiii.,  xxiv.,  kc. ;  Jor.  xvi.. 
XXV. ;  Ezek.  xxvi.,  xxdi. ;  Amos  vi.  5 — 7. 


CLOSING    VISIONS.  321 

after  the  Word  of  God,  and  the  fowls  of  the  air  are 
sumrQoned  to  feed  on  the  flesh  of  kings  and  captains 
slain  in  impious  battle.  The  Beast  and  the  False 
Prophet  are  cast  into  the  Lake  of  Fire,  and  their 
followers  are  slain  by  the  sword  of  the  heavenly  Eider. 
Satan  is  bound  for  a  thousand  years,  and  the  Millen- 
nium of  the  Saints  begins.^  When  the  thousand 
years  are  ended,  Satan  is  to  be  loosed  to  gather  all  the 
heathen,  Gog  and  Magog,^  to  the  final  battle  against 
God,  after  which  he  shall  be  flung  to  join  the  Beast 
and  the  False  Prophet  in  the  Lake  of  Fire.  The  great 
White  Throne  is  set.  The  dead  are  judged.  There 
is  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth.  Glowing  with  gold 
and  gems,^  the  New  Jerusalem  descends  out  of  heaven 
from  God,*  through  whose  streets  flows,  bright  as  cr3'-stal,. 
the  Eiver  of  the  water  of  life,  and  there  is  no  Temple 
there,  nor  light  of  moon  nor  sun,  for  the  Lord  God 
gives  them  light; — and  there  shall  be  no  more  curse. ^ 
The  book  ends  with  that  which  is  the  burden  of  the 


^  A  literal  millenarianism  lias  been  generally  condemned  by  the 
Catholic  Church.  Victorinus  and  the  earliest  commentators  understood 
the  1,000  years  to  have  begun  at  the  Incarnation.  Origen  and  most  of 
the  Fathers  understood  it  spiritually  and  metaphorically. 

^  Barbarian  nations  from  the  North  (Ezek.  sxxviii.,  xxxix.).  Abarbanel 
on  Jer.  xxx.  calls  them  nations  from  the  East. 

^  Derived  from  Is.  liv.  12 ;  and  comp.  Talkut  Shimeoni,  f.  54,  a. 

^  The  Rabbis  inferred  from  Ps.  cxxii.  3,  that  there  was  "  a  Jerusalem 
above  "  (Taanith,  f.  5,  a) ;  and  Rabbi  Johanan  says,  "  The  Holy  One  will 
bring  precious  stones  and  pearls,  each  measuring  30  cubits  by  30,  and 
after  polishing  them  down  to  20  cubits  by  20,  will  place  them  in  the 
gates  of  Jerusalem  "  (Bava  Bathra,  f.  25,  a).  Again,  "  The  Jerusalem  of 
this  world  is  not  as  the  Jerusalem  of  the  world  to  come.  The  former  is 
open  to  all ;  to  the  latter  (Rev.  xxi.  5)  none  shall  go  up  but  those  who  are 
ordained  to  enter  "  {id.  lb,  h).  As  to  its  height  (Rev.  xxi.  16)  the  Rabbis 
say  that  God  will  place  it  on  the  summits  of  Mounts  Sinai,  Tabor,  and 
Carmel  (Isa.  ii.  2). 

*  Zech.  xiv.  11. 


322  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

whole — Yea !  I  come  quickly.  And  the  seer  answers, 
as  all  Christians  have  ever  answered,  Amen  !  Come, 
Lord  Jesus !  ^ 

And  thus  the  whole  book,  from  beginnin^^  to  end, 
teaches  the  great  truths — Christ  shall  triumph  !  Christ's 
enemies  shall  be  overcome  !  They  who  hate  Him  shall 
be  destroyed ;  they  who  love  Him  shall  be  blessed 
unspeakably.  The  doom  alike  of  Jew  and  of  Gentile 
is  already  imminent.  On  Judaea  and  Jerusalem,  on 
Home  and  her  Empire,  on  Nero  and  his  adorers,  the 
judgment  shall  fall.  Sword  and  fire,  and  famine  and 
pestilence,  and  storm  and  earthquake,  and  social  agony 
and  political  terror  are  nothing  but  the  woes  which  are 
ushering  in  the  Messianic  reign.  Old  things  are  rapidly 
passing  away.  The  light  upon  the  visage  of  the  old 
dispensation  is  vanishing  and  fading  into  dimness,  but 
the  face  of  Him  who  is  as  the  sun  is  already  dawning 
through  the  East.  The  new  and  final  covenant  is 
instantly  to  be  established  amid  terrible  judgments ; 
and  it  is  to  be  so  established  as  to  render  impossible  the 
continuance  of  the  old.  Maranatha  !  The  Lord  is  at 
hand !  Even  so  come,  Lord  Jesus !  Mane  nobiscum 
Domine,  nam  advesperascit  I 

'  Tlie  solemn  curse  against  any  one  who  adds  to,  or  takes  from,  the 
book,  was  not  uncommon  in  days  when  literary  forgery  and  interpola- 
tion were  remarkably  common.  Thus  Ircuseus  ended  one  of  his  books 
with  tlie  words :— "  I  adjure  you.  cojiyists  of  this  book,  by  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  by  His  glorious  coming  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  that 
you  compare  and  carefully  correct  your  copy  by  this  exemplar,  and  like- 
wise place  this  adjuration  in  your  copy  "  (0/ij).  i.  p.  821,  ed.  Stiereu).  A 
similar  passage  is  found  at  the  end  of  Rufinus's  prologue  to  his  version 
of  Origen's  Be  Principiis  (see  Huidekoper,  Judaism  at  Borne,  p.  289). 


CHAPTEK   XXIX. 

THE      FALL      OF      JERUSALEM.. 

"The  Lord,  whose' fire  is  iu  Ziou,  aud  His  furnace  iu  Jerusalem "  (Isa. 
xxxi.  9). 

"What  was  the  cause  of  tlie  destruction  of  the  Second  Temple,  seeing 
that  the  age  was  distinguished  for  the  study  of  the  laws  ?......  It  was 

groundless  hatred  "  (Yoma,  f.  9,  b). 

There  is  no  need  to  dwell  upon  the  i'ast  days  of  Jeru- 
salem. Very  little  can  be  added  to  the  horrible  story 
beyond  what  is  to  be  read  by  every  one  in  the  pages  of 
Josephus.^  It  is  true  that  Josephus  has  effectually 
blackened  his  own  memory.  It  would  have  been  well 
for  him  if  he  had  only  written  the  Antlqmfips  and  the 
Bvahgiie  against  Apion.  In  his  Jewish  War,  and,  above 
all,  in  his  autobiography^,  he  stands  confessed  as  a 
false,  heartless,  and  designing  renegade.  The  man  who, 
standing  in  sight  of  the  ruins  of  Zion  and  the  blackened 
area  on  which  had  shone  the  Holy  of  Holies,  compla- 
cently tells  us  how  Titus  gave  him  other  lands  in  Judaea, 
because  those  which  he  had  possessed  near  Jerusalem 
had  become  useless ;  the  man  who  gloatingly  recounts 
the  honours  heaped  upon  him  by  the  conquerors  who 
flung  thousands  of  his  brave  countrymen  to  the  wild 
beasts,   and   sold   tens  of    thousands    more  into    brutal 

^  For  modem  narratives  derived  from  him,  see  F.  de  Saulcy,  Les 
Derniers  Jours  de  Jerusalem,  1866  ;  Milmau,  Hist,  of  Christianity, 
vol.  iii. ;  Merivale,  Hist,  of  the  Romans,  ch.  lix;  Ewald,  Gesch.  vi.  696 
—813. 

V    2 


324  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

misery  ;  tlie  man  wlio,  in  the  sumptuous  palace  wliicli 
he  owed  to  his  conqueror,  could  detail  without  a  sob  the 
extermination  of"  his  people  ;  the  man  who  could  gaze 
with  complacent  infamy  on  the  triumph  which  told  of 
the  destruction  of  his  nation's  liberty,  and  could  look 
on  while  the  hallowed  vessels  of  the  Sanctuary  were 
held  aloft  before  a  Pagan  populace  by  bloodstained 
hands ;  the  man  who  in  youth  haunted  the  boudoir  of 
Poppaea,  and  in  old  age  hung  about  the  antechambers  of 
n)omitian ;  the  man  who  pursued  with  the  posthumous 
hatred  of  successful  treachery  the  brave  though  mis- 
guided patriots  who  had  held  it  a  glory  to  die  for 
Jerusalem — must  stand  forth  till  the  end  of  time  in  the 
immortal  infamy  Avhich  his  own  writings  have  heaped 
upon  himself^  We  cannot  be  surprised  that  all  the 
patriots  of  his  nation  hated  him,  and  tried  to 
disturb  his  base  prosperity  and  "gilded  servitude." 
No  one  trusts  the  word  of  Josephus  where  he  has  the 
least  interest  in  palming  off  upon  us  a  deception. 
But  he  had  no  particular  reason  to  misrepresent  the 
general  facts  of  the  awful  and  heroic  struggle  in  which 
for  a  few  months  he  bore  a  part.  And  since  the 
writings  of  Justus  of  Tiberias,  and  Antonius  Primus 
have  perished,  as  well  as  the  later  part  of  the  History 
of  Tacitus,  Josephus  becomes  our  sole  guide.  The 
Talmud  has  almost  nething  to  tell  us.  In  it  we  look 
in  vain  for  th«  names  of  John,  or  Simon,  or  Eleazar. 
We  only  see  a  dim  glimpse  of  flames  and  assassination, 
and  ruin,  mixed  up  with  curious  legends  and  tales  of 
individual  agony. ^ 

'  See  Derenbonrp,  p.  264,  and  n.  xi. ;  Gratz,  iii.  365,   seg.,  386,  411 ; 
Salvador,  Hisi.  ii.  467 ;  Do  Quineoy,  Worhs. 

^  Derenbourg,  pp.  266, 282 — 288.     Some  of  the  stories  whicli  Joscplms 


FALL    OF    JERUSALEM.  325 

In  April,   a.d.    70,   Titus,   with  a   force  of  80,000 
legionaries  and  auxiliaries,  pitched  his  camp  on  Scopus, 
to  the  north  of  the   city.      Besides  the  2,400  trained 
Jewish  warriors  who  defended  the  walls,  the  city  was 
thronged  with  an  incredible  number  of  Passover   pil- 
grims, and  of  fugitives  from  other  parts  of  Judaea.    Feats 
of  heroic  valour  were  performed  on  both  sides,  and  the 
skill  of  the  besiegers  was  often  checked  by  the  almost 
insane  fury  of  the  besieged.     Fanatically  relying  on  the 
visible  manifestation  of  Jehovah,  while  they  were   in- 
famously  violating  all  His  laws,   the  Zealots   rejected 
with  insult  every  offer  of  terms.     At  last  Titus  drew  a 
line  of   circumvallation   round   the   doomed   city,    and 
began  to  crucify  all  the  deserters  who  fled  to  him.     The 
incidents  of  the  famine  which  then  fell  on  the  besieged 
are  among  the  most  horrible  in  human  literature.     The 
corpses  bred  a  pestilence.    Whole  houses  were  filled  with 
unburied  families  of  the  dead.  Mothers  slew  and  devoured 
their  own  children.      Hunger,  rage,  despair,  and  mad- 
ness seized  the  city.    It  became  a  cage  of  furious  madmen, 
a  city  of  howling  wild  beasts,  and  of  cannibals, — a  hell  !^ 
For  the  first  time  for  five  centuries,  on  July  17,  a.d.  70, 
the  daily  sacrifices  of  the  Temple  ceased  for  want  of 
priests  to  ofier  them.     Disease  and  slaughter  ruthlessly 
accomplished  their  work.  At  last,  amid  shrieks  and  flames, 
and  suicide  and  massacre,  the  Temple  was  taken  and  re- 
duced to  ashes.     The  great  altar  of  sacrifice  was  heaped 
with  the  slain.     The  courts  of  the  Temple  swam  deep  in 
blood.    Six  thousand  miserable  women  and  children  sank 
with  a  wild  cry  of  terror  amid  the  blazing  ruins  of  the 

recounts  of  himself  are  trausfein-ecl  in  the  Talmud  to  the  celebrated  Rabbi 
Yochanan  Ben  Zakkai. 

^  Reuan,  L'Antechrist,  507. 


326  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHKISTIANITY. 

cloisters.  Romans  adored  the  insignia  of  their  legions 
on  the  place  where  the  Holiest  had  stood.  As  soon  as 
they  became  masters  of  the  Upper  City  they  only  ceased 
to  slay  when  they  were  too  weary  to  slay  any  longer. 
According  to  Josephus,  it  had  been  the  earnest  desire  of 
Titus  to  preserve  the  Temple,  but  his  commands  were 
disobeyed  by  his  soldiers  in  the  fury  of  the  struggle. 
According  to  Sulpicius  Severus,  on  the  other  hand,  who 
is  probably  quoting  the  very  words  of  Tacitus,  Titus 
formed  the  deliberate  purpose  to  destroy  Christianity  and 
Judaism  in  one  blow,  believing  that  if  the  Jewish  root 
were  torn  up  the  Christian  branch  would  soon  perish.^ 
The  tallest  and  most  beautiful  youths  were  reserved  for 
the  conqueror's  triumph.  Of  those  above  seventeen 
years  of  age  multitudes  were  doomed  to  work  in  chains 
in  the  Egyptian  mines.  Others  were  sent  as  presents  to 
various  towns  to  be  slain  by  wild  beasts  or  gladiators, 
or  by  each  other's    swords   in   the   provincial   amphi- 

^  "  Alii  et  Titus  ipse  evertencliim  templum  imprimis  ceusebant,  quo 
pleuius  Judaeonim  et  Christianorum  religio  tolleretur.  Quippe  has 
religioues  licet  coutrarias  sibi,  iisdem  tamen  auctoribus- prefect  as;  radice 
sublata  stirpem  facile  peritm-am  "  (Snip.  Sev.  Sacr.  Hist.  ii.  30.  §  6,  7). 
He  had  access  both  to  the  lost  part  of  the  Histories  of  Tacitus,  and  also 
to  the  work  of  Aiitouius  Juliamis,  De  Jvdaeis.  The  latter,  who  was  one 
of  Titus's  council  of  war,  \\Tote  viith  far  less  biassed  motives  than 
Josephus,  who  is  not  to  be  trusted  when  he  had  auything^  to  gain  by 
disguising  the  truth.  Dr.  Bernaj's.  of  Breslan,  believes  that  Sulpicius 
Severus  is  quoting  Tacitus  in  the  sentence  quoted  al>ove.  Griitz  (iii.  403) 
contemptuously  rejects  this  suggestion,  on  the  gi-ound  that  Titus  could 
scarcely  have  heard  of  the  Christians.  But  Titus  saw  a  great  deal  of 
Josephus  and  of  Agi'ippa  II.,  and  there  are  signs  that  Josephus  knew  a 
good  deal  more  about  Christianity  than  he  ventures  to  say,  and  that 
Agrippa  had  not  been  uninHuenced  by  the  arguments  of  St.  Paul  (see 
Derenbuurg,  p.  252).  On  the  other  liand,  Ewald  tliinks  that  this  assertion 
as  to  the  ])ur]K)se  of  Titus  is  weakened  by  the  repetition  of  it  in  the  case 
of  Hadrian  :  ''existimans  se  Ciiristianani  fidem  loci  injuria  "  (i.e.  by  pro- 
faning the  site  of  the  Temple)  "  perenvtiirum  "  (Sulp.  Sev.,  Sacr.  Hint. 
ii.  31,  §  3;  Ewald.  Gesch.  vi.  797). 


FALL    OF    JERUSALEM.  327 

theatres.  The  young  of  both  sexes  were  sold  as  slaves. 
Even  during  the  days  on  which  these  arrangements 
were  being  made,  11,000  perished  for  want  of  food; 
some  because  their  guards  would  not  give  it  to  them, 
others  because  they  would  not  accept  it.  Josephus 
reckons  the  number  of  captives  taken  during  the  war  at 
97,000,  and  the  number  of  those  who  perished  during 
the  siege  at  1,100,000.  The  numbers  who  perished 
in  the  whole  war  are  reckoned  at  the  awful  total  of 
1,337,490,  and  the  number  of  prisoners  at  101,700  ; 
but  even  these  estimates  do  not  include  all  the  items 
of  many  skirmishes  and  battles,  nor  do  they  take  into 
account  the  multitijdes  who,  throughout  the  whole 
country,  perished  of  misery,  famine,  and  disease.  It 
may  well  be  said  that  the  nation  seemed  to  have 
given  itself  "  a  rendezvous  of  extermination."  Two 
thousand  putrefying  bodies  were  found  even  in  the 
subterranean  vaults  of  the  city.  During  the  siege  all 
the  trees  of  the  environs  had  been  cut  down,  and  hence 
the  whole  appearance  of  the  place,  with  its  charred  and 
bloodstained  .ruins,  was  so  completely  altered,  that 
one  who  was  suddenly  brought  to  it  would  not  (we 
are  told)  have  recognised  where  he  was.  And  yet 
the  site  had  been  so  apparently  impregnable,  with  its 
massive  and  unequalled  fortifications,  that  Titus  freely 
declared  that  he  saw  in  his  victory  the  hand  of  God.^ 

^  It  is  curious  to  contrast  tlie  pious,  gentle,  and  amiable  Titus  of 
Josephus,  and  the  "  Love  and  darling  of  the  human  race  "  of  Roman 
historians,  with  "Titus  the  Bad"  (Ha-rasha),  or  "the  Tyrant,"  of  the 
Talmudists.  Their  well-known  legend  tells  that,  being  caught  in  a 
terrible  storm,  and  getting  safe  to  land,  he  defied  God,  "Who,  to  punish 
him,  sent  a  little  gnat  (^JW),  which  crept  up  his  nostrils  into  his  brain, 
and  caused  him  incessant  and  sleepless  anguish.  At  his  death  it  was 
found  to  bo  "as  big  as  a  bird,  and  to  have  a  beak  and  claws  of  steel  " 
(Bereshith  Rabba  x. ;    Tanchuma,  62,  a,  &c.)     It  may  be  imagined  how 


328  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

From  that  time  all  Jews  on  seeing  Jerusalem  rend  their 
garments,  and  exclaim,  "  Zion  is  a  wilderness,  Jerusalem 
a  desolation.  Our  holy  and  beautiful  house,  where  our 
fathers  praised  Thee,  is  burned  with  fire,  and  all  our 
pleasant  things  are  laid  waste. "^ 

It  was  to  this  event,  the  most  awful  in  history — 
"one  of  the  most  awful  eras  in  God's  economy  of 
grace,  and  the  most  awful  revolution  in  all  God's 
religious  dispensations  "  ^ — that  we  must  apply  those 
prophecies  of  Christ's  coming  in  which  every  one  of  the 
Apostles  and  Evangelists  describe  it  as  iiear  at  hand? 
To  those  prophecies  our  Lord  Himself  fixed  these  three 
most  definite  limitations — the  one,  that  before  that 
generation  passed  away  all  these  things  would  be  ful- 
filled ;  *  another,  that  some  standing  there  should  not 
taste  death  till  they  saw  the  Son  of  Man  coming  in  His 
kingdom;^  the  third,  that  the  Apostles  should  not  have 
gone  over  the  cities  of  Israel  till  the  Son  of  Man  be 
come.^  It  is  strange  that  these  distinct  limitations 
should  not  be  regarded  as  a  decisive  proof  that  the  Fall 
of  Jerusalem  was,  in  the  fullest  sense,  the  Second 
Advent  of  the  Son  of  Man,  which  was  primarily  con- 
templated by  the  earliest  voices  of  prophecy. 

And,  indeed,  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  and  all  the  events 
which  accompanied  and  followed  it  in  the  Roman  world 
and  in  the  Christian  Church,  had  a  significance  which  it 

patriotic  Jews  felt  towards  Tiins  Flavins  Joseplius.  Tlio  name  ou  which 
he  prided  himself  would  be  to  them  a  veritable  "  braud  of  the  Beast." 

1  Isa.  Ixiv.  10,  11 ;  Moed  Katou,  f.  2G,  a. 

2  Bp.  Warburton's  Julian,  i.  p.  21. 

3  Acts  ii.  16—20,  40 ;  iii.  19—21 ;  1  Thess.  iv.  13—17  ;  v.  1—16 
2  Thess.  i.  7—10 ;  1  Cor.  i.  7 ;  x.  11 ;  xv.  21 ;  xvi.  22 ;  Rom.  xiii.  11,  12 
Phil.  iii.  20;  iv.  5;  1  Tim.  iv.  1;  2  Tim.  iii.  1;  Heb.  i.  2 ;  x.  25,  37 
James  v.  3,  8,  9 ;  1  Pet.  ii.  7  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  12  ;  1  J.  ii.  18. 

«  Matt.  xxiv.  34.  <*  Matt.  xvi.  28.  "  Matt.  x.  23. 


THE    END    OF    THE    OLD    DISPENSATION.  329 

is  hardly  possible  to  over  estimate.  They  were  the 
final  end  of  the  old  Dispensation.  They  were  the  full 
inauguration  of  the  New  Covenant.  They  were  Grod's 
own  overwhelming  judgment  on  that  form  of  Judaic 
Christianity  which  threatened  to  crush  the  work  of  St. 
Paul,  to  lay  on  the  Gentiles  the  yoke  of  an  abrogated 
Mosaism,  to  establish  itself  by  threats  and  anathemas 
as  the  only  orthodoxy.  Many  of  the  early  Christians — 
and  those  especially  who  lived  at  Jerusalem — were  at 
the  same  time  rigid  Jews.  So  long  as  they  continued  to 
walk  in  the  ordinances  of  their  fathers  as  a  national  and 
customary  duty,  such  observances  were  harmless ;  but 
it  is  the  inevitable  tendency  of  this  external  rigorism 
to  usurp  in  many  minds  the  place  of  true  religion. 
In  every  Church,  as  we  see  from  most  of  the  Catholic 
epistles,  as  well  as  in  those  of  St.  Paul,  the  Judaists 
asserted  themselves,  and  won  over  the  devoted  adhe- 
rence of  the  multitude,  which  is  ever  ripe  for  the  slavery 
of  rigid  dogmas  and  narrow  forms.  It  required  the 
whole  force  of  St.  Paul's  inspired  and  splendid  genius 
to  save  Christianity  from  sinking  into  an  exclusive 
sect  of  repellent  Ebionites.  No  event  less  awful  than 
the  desolation  of  Judaja,  the  destruction  of  Judaism, 
the  annihilation  of  all  possibility  of  observing  the 
precepts  of  Moses,  could  have  opened  the  eyes  of  the 
Judaisers  from  their  dream  of  imagined  infallibility. 
Nothing  but  God's  own  unmistakable  interposition — 
nothing  but  the  manifest  coming  of  Christ — could  have 
persuaded  Jewish  Christians  that  the  Law  of  the 
Wilderness  was  annulled ;  that  the  idolised  minutise  of 
Levitism  could  no  longer  claim  to  be  divinely  obliga- 
tory ;  that  the  Temple,  to  which  so  many  myriads  had 
resorted  from  every  region  of  the  world,  as  to  a  common 


330  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

refuge,  where  they  found  peace  and  forgiveness  and 
holy  thoughts  and  joyous  hopes/  had  been  smitten  to 
the  ground  as  though  by  flashes  of  God's  own  avenging 
fire ;  that  the  sacrifices,  of  which  Philo  had  so  recently 
said,  "  they  are  being  offered  even  until  now,  and  they 
shall  be  offered  for  ever,"^  had  been  finally,  decisively, 
and,  by  the  direct  action  of  Divine  Providence,  annulled. 
It  was  absurd  to  imagine  that  salvation  could  in  any 
way  depend  on  obedience  to  a  law  to  which  obedience 
had  been  rendered  impossible  by  God's  own  decree.  The 
facts,  so  terrible  to  Jewish  imagination,  that  the  steps 
of  the  profane  had  carried  their  bloody  footprints  into 
the  Holiest,  where  only  the  High  Priest  could  enter  once 
a  year;  that  the  unclean  hands  of  Gentiles  had  been 
laid  on  the  golden  altars ;  that  the  sacred  rolls  of  the 
Torali,  for  which  any  Jew  would  have  been  ready  to 
die,  had  been  carried  captive,  for  every  profane  eye 
to  gaze  upon,  along  the  streets  of  Edom  and  Babylon — 
were  but  symbols  of  the  yet  deadlier  fact  that  henceforth 
that  law  could  not  be  kept,  nor  the  Paschal  lamb  slain, 
nor  the  ceremonies  of  even  the  Great  Day  of  Atonement 
any  longer  observed.  Judaism,  a  religion  of  which  the 
Temple  was  the  most  essential  centre,  of  which  sacri- 
fices were  the  most  essential  element,  became  a  religion 
without  a  temple  and  without  a  sacrifice.  It  became 
no  longer  possible  for  even  the  most  Pharisaic  of  sacer- 
dotalists  to  talk  as  though  the  very  universe  depended 
on  ceremonies  and  vestments,  or  on  the  right  burning 
of  the  two  kidneys  with  the  fat. 

Christian   historians    rightly   appreciate   the  signi- 
ficance  of  the    event.     The  Temple,  says  Orosius,  was 

*  Philo,  De  Monorchia  (Mangey,  ii.  223). 
2  Id.,  Leg.  ad  Gahun  (Mangey,  ii.  569). 


ABROGATION    OF   JUDAISM.  331 

overthrown  and  done  away  with,  because  it  could  no 
longer  serve  any  good  or  useful  object,  since  now  the 
Church  of  God  was  vigorously  germinating  throughout 
the  world.^  When,  in  a.d.  120,  JEtlm  Capitolina  was 
built  by  Hadrian  on  the  ruins  of  Jerusalem,  and  Chris- 
tians were  allowed  free  access  to  it,  while  no  Jew  was 
suffered  to  approach  it,  the  Church  of  the  Circumcision 
was  practically  at  an  end.  "  Up  to  that  time,"  says 
Sulpicius  Severus,  "  almost  all  Christians  in  Judsea 
observed  the  Law  while  they  worshipped  Christ  as  God  ; 
but  it  was  the  result  of  God's  ordinance  that  hence- 
forth the  slavery  of  the  Law  should  be  taken  away  from 
the  freedom  of  the  Church."'  The  Church  of  iEiia 
Capitolina  was  no  longer  prevalently  Judaic ;  nay  more, 
in  a  mission  to  Hadrian  it  formally  severed  itself  from 
the  Jews.  For  the  first  time,  in  a.d.  137,  it  selected  as 
its  bishop  Marcus,  an  uncircnmcised  Gentile.^  The  event 
significantly  proved  that  even  in  Judsea  the  future 
destinies  of  the  Christian  Church  were  in  no  further 
dano-er  of  fallino^  into  the  hands  of  either  Ebionites  or 
Nazarenes.^  The  Church  then  emancipated  itself  finally 
and  for  ever  from  the  trammels  of  the  Synagogue. 

No  one  was  more  deeply  influenced  by  this  event  than 
St.  John.  A  full  quarter  of  a  century  elapsed  between 
the  ripe  manhood  when  he  wrote  the  Apocalypse  and  the 

1  "  Ecclesia  Dei  jam  per  totum  orbem  germinante,  hoc  (templum)  tan- 
quam  efEoetum  et  vacuum  nullique  usui  bono  commodum  arbitrio  Dei 
auferendum  fuit"  (Oros.  vii.  9). 

2  Sulp.  Sev.  H.  S.  ii.  31. 

'  Euseb.  n.  E.  iv.  6 ;  Griitz,  Gesch.  d.  Juden.  iv.  183. 

*  The  furious  persecutions  and  massacres  of  Christians  by  the  False 
Messiah  Bar  Oochba  (a.d.  132—134),  which  first  thoroughly  opened  tlio 
eyes  of  the  Pagan  world  to  the  difference  between  Jews  and  Christians, 
were  duo  alike  to  the  rejection  of  his  claims  by  the  Christians,  and  their 
refusal  to  join  him  in  his  revolt "  (Gratz,  Gesch.  iv.  154,  467). 


332  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

old  age  in  whicli  he  wrote  the  Gospel  and  Epistles.  The 
colouring  and  spirit  of  the  Apocalypse  are  clearly 
Judaic ;  but  we  see  alike  in  the  advanced  Christology/ 
and  in  the  recognition  of  the  equality  of  the  re- 
deemed Gentiles,^  and  in  the  absence  of  any  Temple 
in  the  New  Jerusalem,  how  far  St.  John  was  removed 
from  the  heresies  of  those  Jewish  Christians  to  whom 
Christ  was  no  more  than  the  Jewish  Messiah,  and 
Christianity  no  more  than  an  engrafting  of  their  belief 
upon  an  otherwise  unchanged  Pharisaism.  And  yet, 
though  the  Gospel  and  Epistles  are  identical  with  the 
Apocalypse  in  essential  doctrines — though  the  thought 
of  Christ  as  the  Victim  Lamb  is  prominent  in  both — we 
see  how  wide  is  the  difference  which  separates  them;  how 
much  calmer  is  the  style,  how  much  deeper  the  revelation, 
contained  in  the  later  writings  ;  how  the  light  which 
had  dawned  so  brightly  upon  the  Apostles  in  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem  had  shone  more  and  more  unto 
the  perfect  day.  The  Gospel  and  Epistles  contain  the 
same  truths  as  the  Apocalypse,'^  but  the  symbols  are 
spiritualised.  Jerusalem,  even  as  a  symbol,  no  longer 
occupies  the  foreground  of  his  thoughts,  and  positive 
Judaic  ordinances  sink  into  insignificance  in  comparison 
with  the  knowledge  of  God  which  is  eternal  life.  The 
Apocalypse  is  mainly  occupied  with  the  awfulness  of 
retribution  :  the  Gospel  and  Epistles  are  dominated  by 
the  ideal  of  love. 

Unless  these  considerations  be  admitted  in  their 
fullest  extent,  it  becomes  impossible  to  maintain  that 
writings  so  different,  even  amid  their  partial  similari- 

1  Rev.  iii.  14 ;  v.  13 ;  xix.  13 ;  xvii.  14 ;  xix.  16,  &c. 

2  Rov.  vii.  9. 

3  As  even  Baur  admits  {Three  Christian  Centuries,  i.  154). 


THE    APOCALYPSE    AND    THE    GOSPEL.  333 

ties,  could  have  come  from  the  same  hand.  It  is  true 
that  in  the  Apocalypse  we  have  a  material  eschatology, 
and  in  the  later  writings  a  spiritual  consummation.  It  is 
true  that  the  Apocalypse  is  an  expression  of  Judaic  Chris- 
tianity, and  that  the  Gospel  and  Epistles  are  not.  It  is 
true  that  the  points  of  contrast  which  they  offer  are  more 
salient  than  their  resemblances.  It  is  even  true  that 
both  could  never  have  existed  simultaneously  in  the  same 
mind.  In  the  Apocalypse  the  symbols  of  Heaven  itself 
are  mainly  Jewish  and  Levitical,  and  in  the  Grospel  the 
evanescence  and  annulment  of  such  forms  is  clearly 
proclaimed.  In  the  Apocalypse  the  elements  of  Divine 
wrath  are  mainly  depicted  in  phraseology  borrowed 
from  the  old  prophetic  images  ;  in  the  later  writings 
God  is  depicted  almost  exclusively  in  the  attributes  of 
compassion  and  love.  In  the  Apocalypse  Christ  is  the 
Lion  of  the  Tribe  of  Judah,  the  ruler  who,  with  a  rod 
of  iron,  shall  dash  the  nations  in  pieces  like  a  potter's 
vessel ;  in  the  Gospel  He  is  the  Good  Shepherd  who 
layeth  down  His  life  for  the  sheep.  In  the  later  writings 
there  are  no  wars  and  collisions — no  acts  of  awful  ven- 
geance at  which  the  saints  look  on  with  exultation ;  but 
the  world  is  something  wholly  apart  from  the  kingdom 
of  the  saints,  and  that  kingdom  is  spiritual  and  in  the 
heart.  In  the  Apocalypse  the  Antichrist  is  a  blood- 
stained Roman  Emperor ;  in  the  Epistles  there  are  many 
antichrists,  and  they  are  forms  of  speculative  error.  In 
the  Apocalypse  there  are  two  resurrections,  both 
physical,  one  before,  one  after,  the  Millennium ;  in  the 
Gospel  the  first  and  chief  resurrection  is  that  from  the 
death  of  sin  to  the  life  of  righteousness.  In  the  Apo- 
calypse Heaven  is  wholly  a  future  splendour;  in  the 
Epistles  it  is  already  a  living  and  present  realisation  of 


334  THE    EARLY   DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

God's  presence  in  the  heart.  The  Apocalyptist  consoles 
the  Christian  sufferer  with  the  hope  of  what  he  shall 
be ;  the  Evangelist  with  the  knowledge  of  what  he  is.^ 

How,  then,  it  may  be  asked,  can  the  Evangelist  and 
the  Seer  of  Patmos  be  one  and  the  same  person  ?^ 

They  are  one  and  the  same,  but  divided  from  each 
other  by  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century — by  more  than 
twenty  years  of  divine  education  and  broadening  light. 
Many  of  these  differences  arise  from  the  dealing  with 
truths  which  are  indeed  widely  diverse,  but  which  yet 
are  equally  true,  and  which  are  necessary  to  complement 
each  other.  Many  of  them  may  be  summed  up  and 
accounted  for  in  the  single  remark  that  the  Apocalypse 
is  an  Apocal3^pse,  and  that  it  was  written  amid  the 
throbbingr  ag-onies  of  the  Jewish  war  and  after  the- 
bloodstained  horrors  of  the  Neronian  persecution.  At 
that  time  St.  John  still  belonged  in  training  and  sym- 
pathy to  the  Church  of  the  Circumcision.  The  Gospel 
and  Epistles,  on  the  other  hand,  were  written  after  long 
residence  among  Gentiles,  wlien  the  whole  perspective 
of  the  Apostle's  thoughts  had  been  altered  by  the  flood 
of  divine  illumination  cast  alike  upon  the  Old  and  the 
New  Covenant  by  the  fulfilment  of  Christ's  own  pro- 
phecies of  His  coming.  After  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem 
He  had  established  His  kingdom  upon  earth  by  closing 
for  ever  the  Jewish  dispensation. 

Nor  must  it  be  forgotton  that  amid  all  the  differences 
which  separate  these  writings  there  are  many  subtle 
similarities  in  the  temperament  of  the  writer,  in  his 

>  Sec  Reuss,  Tlist.  de  la  TIicol.  Chret.  ii.  56-4 — 571. 

*  Ewald  says  with  liis  usual  positiveness,  "  Sie  ergibt  sich  je  genaner 
man  sie  nacli  allcu  Seiteu  liin  untersucht  .  .  .  desto  ge^dsser  als  vou 
einom  gauz  anderu  Sehriftsteller  uud  als  iiicht  voin  Apostel  verfasst  " 
(Joliann.  Schriften,  ii.  1). 


THE   APOCALYPSE    AND    THE    GOSPEL.  335 

phraseology,  and  in  his  theological  standpoint.  In  both 
we  have  the  prominent  conception  of  Christ  as  the  Lamb 
of  Grod ;  ^  in  both — and  in  them  alone — He  is  called 
"The  Word."  In  both  we  read  of  the  "  Living  Water." 
In  both  we  find  the  recognition  of  the  priority  in  time  of 
the  Jew  and  of  the  admission  of  the  Grentiles.  Both 
books  give  prominence  to  the  prophecy  of  Zechariah 
(xii.  10),  "  they  shall  look  upon  me  whom  they  have 
pierced,"  and  both  in  their  reference  to  this  verse 
diverge  in  the  same  way  from  the  LXX.  No  careful 
student  of  St.  John's  writings  can  fail  to  see  that  in 
many  respects,  and  in  relation  to  many  doctrines,  an 
identity  of  essence  underlies  the  dissimilarity  of  form.^ 
Not  one  of  the  Johannine  books  could  be  spared  from 
the  sacred  canon  without  manifest  and  grievous  loss ; 
all  of  them  are  rich  in  truths  which  are  necessary  to 
make  us  wise  unto  salvation. 

^  In  the  Gospel  aij.v6i,  in  the  Apocalypse  apviov.  It  hasheen  ingeniously 
suggested  that  apviov  may  have  been  chosen  as  physiologically  equivalent 
in  sound  to  dripiov. 

^  For  a  most  satisfactoiy  proof  of  this,  see  Gebhardt,  Doctrine  of  the 
Apocalypse  (E.  Tr.,  Clark,  Edinb.  1878).  Isolated  resemblances  are  Rev. 
ii.  2;  John  xvi.  12  ("  cannot  bear");  Rev.  ii.  3;  John  iv.  6  ("faint"); 
angels  and  saints  ''in  white"  (eV  \evKo?s,  Rev.  iii.  18;  John  xx.  12)  ;  effects 
of  "  anointing  "  (Rev.  iii.  18 ;  1  John  ii.  20).  Besides  these  there  are  other 
verbal  resemblances,  such  as  Tr}pe7v  \6yov,  or  \6yovs  (Rev.  iii.  8,  16;  xxii. 
7,  9,  &C. ;  John  viii.  51  ;  1  John  ii.  5) ;  iroie^v  \pevdos,  or  aArtdetav  (Rev.  xxii. 
15  ;  1  John  i.  6) ;  aHfiara  (?  B,  &c.)  (Rev.  xviii.  24  ;  John  ii.  13) ;  "  He  that 
is  true  "  (Rev.  iii.  7  ;  xix.  11 ;  John  i.  14 ;  xiv.  6  ;  1  John  v.  20) ;  and  the 
common  peculiar  usage  of  the  words  a\7j0iv6s,  ppovrj],  SaifiSviov,  k^paL<ni, 
fKtfVTeTv,  vif/is,  wop<pvpeos,  crKrjvovi/,  (r<pdTTeiv,  &c.  On  the  other  side  see, 
among  others,  Diisterdieck,  pp.  73 — 80;  Ewald,  Johann.  Schriften,  ii. 
52,  53,  61,  62. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 


THE    GROWTH    OF  HERESY. 


.    .    .   .   cis  &pa  /ue'xpi  Twv  rSre  XP'^''""'  "TapOtvoi  Kadapa  Kai  aSidtpdopos  f/xftvti'  rj 

■E/(/cA.r;o-ra.— Hegesipp.  Op.  Eusob.  H.  E.  iii.  32. 

"La  fumee  qui  obscurcit  le  Soleil  c'est  a  dire  I'heresie." — Bossuet. 

There  were,  as  I  have  said,  three  great  events  which 
deeply  influenced  the  last  and  most  active  period  of 
the  life  of  St.  John — -the  Neronian  persecution,  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  growth  of  Heresy.  The 
two  former  events,  which  were  sudden  and  overwhelm- 
ing, woke  their  tremendous  echoes  in  the  Apocalypse. 
The  tliird  event  was  very  gradual.  We  find  traces 
of  it  in  the  letters  to  the  Seven  Churches,  but  it  had 
a  still  deeper  influence  on  the  Gospel  and  the  Epistles, 
which  were  the  inestimable  fruit  of  the  Apostle's 
ripest  years.  According  to  the  tradition  of  the  Church, 
they  were  especially  written  to  combat  heresy,  not 
by  the  method  of  direct  and  vehement  controversy,  but 
by  that  noblest  of  all  methods  which  consists  in  the 
irresistible  presentation  of  counter  truths. 

The  word  "  heresy,"  though  it  is  used  in  the 
Authorised  Version  to  translate  the  hairesis  of  the  New 
Testament,  has  not  the  same  meaning.  The  w^ord  was 
not  originally  applied  in  a  bad  sense.  In  Classic 
Greek,  for  instance,  it  merely  meant  a  choice  of  prin- 
ciples,  a  school  of  philosophy  or  of  thought.^     In  the 

*  Sext.  Empir.  i.  16  ;  Cic.  ad  Fam.  xv.  16,  3. 


HERESY.  337 

New  Testament  it  comes  to  mean  "  a  faction,"  and  the 
sin  condemned  by  the  word  is  not  the  adoption  of 
erroneous  opinions,  but  the  factiousness  of  party  spirit} 
It  was,  however,  perfectly  natural  that  it  should  come  to 
mean^  a  wrong-  choice,  a  false  system.  For  Christianity 
being  a  divine  revelation  involves  a  fellowship  and  unity 
in  all  essential  verities,  and  he  who  gives  undue  prepon- 
derance to  his  own  arbitrary  conceptions,  he  who  allows 
to  subjective  influences  or  traditional  errors  an  un- 
limited sway  ov^er  his  interpretations  of  truth,  becomes 
a  heretic.  And  in  this  sense  many  are  heretics  who 
most  pride  themselves,  on  their  vaunted  catholicity  ; 
for  the  source  of  all  heresies  is  the  spirit  of  pride, 
and  the  worst  of  all  heresies  is  the  spirit  of  hatred. 
The  word  "  heretic "  has  indeed  been'  shamefully 
abused.  It  lias  again  and  again  been  applied,  in  a 
thoroughly  heretical,  and  worse  than  heretical  manner, 
to  the  insight  and  insj)iration  of  the  few  who  have 
discovered  aspects  of  truth  hitherto  unnoticed,  or 
restored  old  truths  by  the  overthrow  of  dominant 
perversions.  A  Church  can^  only  prove  its  possession  of 
life  by  healthy  development.  Morbid  uniformity,  en- 
forced b}^  the  tyranny  of  a  dominant  sect,  is  the  most 
certain  indication  of  dissolution  and  decay.  Since 
Christianity  is  manysided,  the  worst  form-  of  heresy 
is  the  mechanical  suppression  of  divergence  from 
popular  shibboleths.  Every  great  reformer  in  turn, 
every  discoverer  of  new  forms  or  expressions  of  religious 
truth,  every  slayer  of  old  and  monstrous  errors,  has  been 
called  a  heretic.    When  a  new  truth  could  not  be  refuted, 

^  It  only  occurs  in  Acts  v.  17;  xv.  5  ;  xxiv.  5,  14;  xxvi.  5  ;  xxviii.  22; 
1  Cor.  xi.  19 ;  Gal.  v.  20 ;  2  Pet.  ii.  1. 
*  See  Neander,  Q)i.  Hist.  ii.  4. 

W 


338  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

it  was  easy  for  the  members  of  a  dominant  party  to  gratify 
their  impotent  hatred  by  burning  him  who  had  uttered 
it ;  and  though  religious  partisans  can  no  longer  commit 
to  the  flames  those  who  differ  from  them,  it  is  as  true 
in  our  days  as  in  those  of  Milton,  that — 

"  Men  whose  faith,  learning,  life,  and  pure  intent 
Would  have  been  held  in  high  esteem  by  Paul, 
Must  now  be  called  and  printed  '  heretic  ' 
By  shallow  Edwards  and  Scotch  what  d'ye  call." 

But  the  real  heretics  were,  in  most  cases,  the  sup- 
porters of  ecclesiastical  tyranny  and  stereotyped  igno- 
rance, by  whom  these  martyrs  were  tortured  and  slain. 
He,  and  he  only,  is,  in  the  strict  and  technical  sense 
of  the  word,  a  heretic,  who  denies  the  fundamental 
truths  of  Christianity,  as  embodied  in  the  catholic 
creeds  which  sufficed  to  express  the  doctrines  of  the 
Church  in  the  first  four  centuries  of  her  history. 
But  we  are  taught  by  daily  experience  that  it  is 
possible  to  hold  catholic  truth  in  an  heretical  spirit, 
and  heresy  in  a  catholic  spirit.  By  the  fraud  of  the 
devil  many  a  Catholic  has  acted  in  the  spirit  of 
an  infidel ;  and,  by  the  grace  of  God,  many  a  heretic 
has  shown  the  virtue  of  a  saint.  As  for  the  existence  of 
diversity  in  the  midst  of  general  unity,  it  is  not  only 
inevitable,  but,  in  our  present  condition  of  imperfection, 
it  is  the  only  means  to  secure  a  right  apprehension  of 
truth.  Christianity  may  be  regarded  in  two  aspects — 
as  a  law  of  life  and  as  a  system  of  doctrines.  But 
neither  was  the  law  of  life  laid  down  in  rigid  precepts, 
nor  was  the  plan  of  salvation  set  forth  in  dialectics. 
Men  may  be  pure  and  true  Christians,  though  their 
holiness  reveals  itself   in  manifold  varieties  of   form ; 


SOURCES    OF    HERESY.  339 

they  may  be  in  faithful  and  conscientious  communion 
with  the  Catholic  Church,  though  the  inevitable 
differences  of  individuality  lead  to  different  modes  of 
apprehending  the  essential  Grospel.  All  that  is  indis- 
pensable is  that  their  varieties  of  opinion  should  be  subor- 
dinate to  one  divine  unit}^  and  that  their  mode  of  life 
under  all  differences  should  express  some  aspect  of 
the  one  divine  ideal. 

The  moral  fibre  of  bitterness'from  which  all  heresies 
spring  is  one  and  the  same.  Whether  they  result  from 
the  blind  and  tyrannous  unanimity  of  corrupt  Churches, 
or  the  wild  self-assertion  of  opinionated  individuals,  they 
owe  their  ultimate  origin  to  the  pride  and  ambition  of  the 
heart.  But  the  intellectual  sources  of  heresy  were  mani- 
fold. It  was  produced  by  the  contact  of  Christianity 
with  Heathenism  and  with  Judaism,  and  was  especially 
derived  from  the  forms  of  philosophy  which  had  sprung 
up  in  the  bosom  of  both  religions. 

The  Gentiles,  as  a  rule,  hated  the  Mosaic  Law,  and 
looked  on  Christianity  as  the  antagonist  of  Judaism, 
rather  than  as  its  dissolution  and  fulfilment.  The  Jews, 
on  the  other  hand,  saw  in  Christianity  only  an  accre- 
tion to  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  clung  to  the  most  rigid 
letter  of  institutions  which  Heathenism  despised.  Hence, 
amid  the  numberless  ramifications  of  heretical  sects 
which  disturbed  the  Church  of  the  first  century,  and 
which  were  massed  together  under  the  vague  and  often 
inappropriate  name  of  Gnosticism,  some  were  Judaic 
and  some  were  anti- Judaic. 

1.  To  the  Jewish  sects  we  have  already  alluded. 
They  may  be  classed  under  the  two  heads  of  Nazarenes 
and  Ebionites. 

We  have  been  obliged  again  and  again  to  notice 
w  2 


340  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

that   the   earliest    decades    after    the    Ascension   were 
marked   by   a   severe    struggle  between   the    views    ot 
Judaising  and  of  Gentile  Christians.      St.  James,  the 
head  of  the   Judaisers,  had  nevertheless  adopted   the 
views  of    St.    Peter   as    regards    the    freedom    of   the 
Gentiles,   and  while   he    continued  to  be    a    blameless 
observer  of  the   Mosaic  Law,  he    gave    full    tolerance 
to  all  converts  from  Paganism  who  did  not  violate  the 
Noachian  precepts.     This  was  the  decision  of  the  S3^nod 
at   Jerusalem.     But   the  party   who  wrote  upon  their 
banners  the  name   of   the    Bishop  of  Jerusalem  went 
much  further.      It  was  one  of  the  main  works  of  St. 
Paul's  life  to  counteract  their  surreptitious  methods  of 
strangling  the  growth  of  true  Christianity  by  insisting 
that  all  Gentiles  must  be  circumcised,  and  must  observe 
the  entire  Levitic  Law.     It  was  in  the  ranks  of  these 
Judaists  that    there    arose   that   imminent   danger   of 
apostasy  against  which  they  had  received  such  solemn 
warnings   in    the    Epistle   to    the    Hebrews,  and   the 
Epistle  of  St.  James  himself;  it  was  from  their  ranks 
also  that  there   arose  the    two  sects  of  Ebionites  and 
Nazarenes. 

It  may  well  be  thought  strange  that  the  most 
definite  existence  of  these  Jewish  Christian  sects  falls  in 
the  era  after  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  when  it  might 
have  been  deemed  impossible  for  any  one  to  retain  the 
opinion  that  God  had  intended  the  Jewish  Law  to  be 
eternally  obligatory.  But  prejudice,  fortified  by  custom, 
is  almost  ineradicable.  Judaism,  when  robbed  of  all 
power  to  observe  its  ritual,  took  refuge  in  its  Law,  re- 
garded as  a  separate  and  ideal  entity.  The  disease 
uncured  even  by  the  amputation  of  its  chief  limb, 
fastened  itself  with   unabated   virulence   on    the   vital 


ADORATION    OF    THE    LAW.  341 

organs.  The  Mosaic  Law  assumed  in  the  minds  of 
Talmudists  the  place  of  God  Himself,  and  by  the  Law 
they  meant  not  morals  but  Eabbinism,  not  the  Deca- 
logue but  the  Halacha.  When  Pope  says  that  in  some 
of  the  discussions  of  the  Paradise  Lost — 

*'  In  quibbles  angel  and  archangel  join, 
And  God  the  Father  turns  a  school  divine," 

he  was  using  the  broadest  satire ;  but  his  words  are 
applicable  in  their  most  literal  sense  to  the  teachings  of 
the  Rabbis,  who  arrogantly  usurped  the  exclusive  name 
of  HacUakamim,  or  "  the  Wise."  They  represent  God  as 
Himself  a  student  of  the  Torah.  They  disputed  whether 
God  Himself  did  not  wear  phylacteries/  They  represent 
Heaven  as  a  great  Rabbinic  school  in  which  there  are 
differences  of  opinion  about  the  Halacha.  On  one 
occasion,  they  assert,  there  was  a  dispute  in  the  celestial 
academy  about  the  minutisB  of  a  Levitic  decision,  and 
as  the  Deity  took  one  view  while  the  angels  took  the 
opposite,  it  became  necessary  to  summon  the  soul  of 
Rabbi  Bar  Nachman.  To  him  consequently  the  Angel 
of  Death  is  despatched.  The  Rabbi  is  asked  his 
opinion,  and  gives  it  on  the  side  of  the  Almighty,  who 
is  represented — with  a  7iawete  astonishing  in  its  blas- 
phemous arrogance — as  highly  pleased  with  the  result 
of  the  discussion  !  ^ 

If  then  the  Jews  could  still  find  space  for  the 
practice  and  idealisation  of  their  Levitism  when  scarcely 
one  of  its  directions  could  be  carried  out — if  almost 
without  an  effort  the  schools  of  Jamnia  and  Tiberias  and 
Pumbeditha   could    transform   their    theocracy   into   a 

1  Bab.  Berachoth,  6  a,  7  a  (p.  240,  Schwab). 

2  Babha  Metzia,  86,  a. 


ai2  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

nomocracy,  and  their  theology  into  a  Levitic  scholasticism, 
we  are  hardly  surprised  to  find  that  the  influence  of 
old  traditions  was  sufficiently  strong,  and  especially 
within  the  limits  of  the  Holy  Land,  to  keep  alive  the 
spirit  of  Jewish  Christianity.  Far  on  into  the  fourth, 
and  perhaps  even  down  to  the  fifth,  century  there  con- 
tinued to  be  not  only  "  Gcnists,''  or  Jews  by  race,  and 
'' Ma.sbothcans,''  who  observed  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  and 
"  Mei'isfs,"  who  kept  up  a  partial  observance  of  the 
Jewish  Law,^  but  also  organised  Christian  sects,  who, 
although  they  were  excluded  from  the  bosom  of  the 
orthodox  Church,  had  a  literature  of  their  own — the 
ancient  counterpart  of  the  modern  "  religious  news- 
paper " — and  not  only  maintained  their  ground,  but 
even  displayed  a  wide-spread  and  proselytising  activity. 
a.  The  Nazarenes,  as  a  distinctive  sect,  were  the 
Jewish  Christians  who  did  not  remove  from  Pella 
when — if  we  may  accept  the  ancient  tradition — the 
fugitive  Church  of  Jerusalem  returned  to  ^lia  Capi- 
tolina,"  which  no  Jew  was  allowed  to  enter.  But  they 
existed  much  earlier,  and  are  to  be  regarded  less  as 
deliberate  heretics  than  as  imperfect,  narrow-minded, 
and  unenlightened  Christians.  Epiphanius  calls  them 
"  Jews,  and  nothing  else ;  "^  but  since  they  accepted 
the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  acknowledged  the  true 
divinity  of  Christ,*  we  may  set  aside  his  uncharitable 
description  of  them.     If,  as  is  probable,  their  views  are 

1  Hegesippus,  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  22. 

2  Ncantler,  Ch.  Hist.  i.  475. 

3  Epiplian.  Haer.  xxx.  9. 

*  They  are  said,  however,  to  have  denied  His  Prte-existenco  (Euseb. 
H.  E,  iii.  27),  but  we  may  class  them  with  the  rhv  'iriaovv  airoSfx<i/^f>'oi  of 
Origen  (c.  Cels.  v.  61).  The  reason  why  the  early  allusions  to  them  are 
coutradictory,  is  because  the  opinions  of  these"  subdichotomies  of  petty 
bchisms  "  were  doubtless  ill-defined. 


NAZARENES    AND    EBIONITES.  343 

represented  by  the  Testament  of  the  TioeJve  Patri- 
archs, we  can  see  that  while  they  clung  with  needless 
tenacity  to  the  obsolete  and  the  abrogated,  this  was 
only  the  result  of  limited  insight  and  national  custom. 
Their  reversion  to  the  religion  of  the  Patriarchs,  as 
representing  a  purer  and  more  absolute  religion  than  the 
Levitic  system,  is  distinctly  Pauline,  and  they  honestly 
accepted  the  faith  of  Christ.^  It  has  been  inferred  from 
passages  of  this  book  that  they  held  the  view  that 
Jesus  only  became  a  Divine  Being  at  His  baptism,  but 
the  expressions  used  seem  to  be  at  least  capable  of 
a  more  innocent  and  orthodox  interpretation.^ 

b.  The  Ebionites,  on  the  other  hand,  were  darinsrlv 
heretical.  They  rejected  altogether  the  writings  of  St. 
Paul,^  and  pursued  his  memory  for  some  generations 
with  covert  but  virulent  calumny.  They  insisted  on 
the  necessity  of  circumcision  and  the  universal  validity 
of  the  Law.  They  regarded  Christ  as  a  mere  man,  the 
son  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  justified  only  by  his  legal 
righteousness.*  To  these  views  some  of  the  Ebionites — 
who  died  away  as  an  obscure  sect  on  the  shores  of  the 
Dead  Sea — superadded  ascetic  notions  and  practices 
which  they  seem  to  have  borrowed  from  the  Essenes.^ 
Hence,  in  all  probability,  was  derived  their  name  of 
Ebionites,  from  the  Hebrew  word  Ehion,  "  poor."  The 
error  that  there  was  such  a  person  as  Ebion  was  due  to 

1  See  Neander,  Gh.  Hist.  ii.  19 — 21 ;  Mansel,  Gnostic  Heresies,  pp. 
123—128;  Lightfoot,  Galatians,  ^p.  298—301;  Ritscbl,  Altkath.  Kirche, 
pp.  152,  seq. 

2  Test.  XII.  Patr.,  Levi,  18 ;  Simeon,  7. 
'  Orig.  c.  Gels.  \.  ad  Jin. 

*  Heuce  Marius  Mercator  calls  them  Homuncionitae  {Refut.  anath. 
Nestor.  12),  and  Laetantius  Anthropiani  {Instt.  iv.  ad  fin.). 

s  Tert.  De  Carn.  Ghristi,  14;  De  Praescr.  33,  48;  Pliilastr.  Haer.  37  ; 
Aug.  de  Haer.  16. 


344  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Epiplianius,  who  calls  him  "  a  successor  of  Cerinthus." 
The  assertion  that  they  were  called  "  paupers  "  because 
they  thought  "  meanly  and  poorly "  of  Christ,  was 
merely  a  way  of  turning  their  name  into  a  reproach.^ 
The  Elcesaites,  or  followers  of  Elxai,  who  were  Ebionites 
with  Essene  and  Gnostic  admixtures,  were  never  more 
than  a  small  and  uninfluential  sect. 

By  the  time  when  St.  John  wrote  his  Gospel  and 
Epistles,  the  question  of  circumcision,  and  all  the  most 
distinctively  Judaic  controversies,  had  ceased  to  be  dis- 
cussed. They  had,  at  any  rate,  lost  all  significance  for  the 
Church  in  general.  The  Nazarenes  and  Ebionites  had 
at  best  but  a  local  influence.  Even  the  Nicolaitans  are 
charged,  not  with  heresy,  but  with  immoral  practices,  and 
with  teaching  indifference  to  idolatry  by  the  ostentatious 
and  indiscriminate  eating  of  meats  offered  to  idols.^ 
This  tendency  to  Antinomianism  was  the  natural  result 
and  the  appropriate  Nemesis  of  that  extravagant  legal 
rigorism  to  which  the  Judaists  strove  to  subjugate  the 
Church. 

2.  The  two  heresiarchs  who  came  into  most  danger- 
ous prominence  in  the  Apostolic  age  are  Simon  Magus 
and  Cerinthus.  If  any  credit  can  be  given  to  the  vague 
and  much-confused  traditions  as  to  their  tenets,  it  is 
clear   that  those  tenets,  at  least   in  their   germ,  were 


1  Dial.  c.  Lucifer.  8  ;  Ps.  Tert.  Append,  cle  Praescr.  48. 

2  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  27. 

2  On  the  Nicolaitaus  see  notes  on  Rov.  ii.  6,  14,  15.  An  account 
of  tlieni,  taken  from  Ireu.  Ilaer.  i.  27;  iii.  11;  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  29; 
Epiphan.  JIaer.  xxv.  1 ;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  ii.  20 ;  iii.  4,  will  he  found 
ill  Ittijjrius,  De  Hceresiarchis,  1.  9,  §  4 ;  Mosheim,  Dc  rebus  Clirid.  ii.  69. 
Tbcy,  like  otber  sects,  are  charged  with  cloaking  licentious  habits  under 
specious  names  (Clem.  Alex,  Strom,  iii.  4 ;  Constt.  Apost.  vi.  8 ;  Iguat. 
Eiy.  ad  Trail,  and  ad  Pliilad.). 


SIMON    MAGUS.  345 

strongly   and   directly    condemned    in    several   of  the 
Epistles. 

a.  Of  Simon  Magus,  "  tlie  liero  of  the  romance  of 
heresy,"  little  is  known  which  is  not  legendary. 
In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles^  we  find  him  in  the  position 
of  a  successful  impostor  in  Samaria,  where  the  whole 
population,  amazed  by  his  sorceries,  accepted  his  asser- 
tion that  he  was  "the  Power  of  God  which  is  called 
Great."  He  was  baptised  by  Philip,  but  proved  the 
hollowness  of  his  religion  by  being  guilty  of  the  first  act 
of  the  sin  which  from  him  is  called  "  simony ;  " — he 
endeavoured  "  to  purchase  the  gift  of  God  with  money." 
According  to  the  high  authority  of  Justin  Martyr — 
who  was  himself  a  Samaritan — Simon  was  a  native  of 
Gitton  in  Samaria.^  Josephus,  in  calling  him  a  Cypriote, 
(if  he  be  speaking  of  the  same  person)  may  have  con- 
fused Gitton  with  Citium  in  Cyprus.^  Felix  made  use 
of  his  iniquitous  agency  in  inveigling  from  her  husband 
the  Herodian  princess  Drusilla."^  He  is  the  subject  of 
many  wild  and  monstrous  legends.  He  is  said  to  have 
been  the  pupil  of  a  certain  Dositheus,  and  to  have  fallen 
in  love  with  his  concubine  Luna  (Selene  or  Helena). 
When  Dositheus  wished  to  beat  him  he  found  that  the 
stick  passed  through  his  body  as  through  smoke. ^  The 
"  sorceries  "  which  he  practised  are  said  to  have  consisted 
in  passing  through  mountains  and  through  fire,  making 
bread  of  stones,  breathing  flames,  and  turning  himself 
into  various  shapes.  With  the  money  that  he  off'ered  to 
St.  Peter  he  purchased  as  his  slave  and  partner  a  woman 

^  Acts  viii. 

2  Just.  Mart.  Afol.  i.  26. 

3  Jos.  Anit.  xviii.  5 ;  xx.  7,  §  2.     Euseb.  B..  E.  ii.  13. 
■*  See  Life  and  Work  of  St.  Paul,  ii.  341. 

^  Constt.  Apod.  vi.  8 ;  Clem.  Becogn.  ii.  31. 


3i6  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

of  Tj'^re  named  Helena.^  Hence  his  followers  are  called 
by  Celsus  Heleniani.  Trenjcus  says"  "  that  he  carried 
this  woman  about  with  him,  calling  her  his  first  Con- 
ception (Ennoia)  and  the  mother  of  all  things.  Descend- 
ing to  the  lower  world,  she  had  produced  the  angels 
and  powers  by  which  the  lower  world  was  made,  and 
had  been  by  them  imprisoned  and  degraded.  She  had 
been  Helen  of  Troy,  and  in  her  fallen  condition  was 
"the  lost  sheep,"  whom  he  had  recovered.  He  himself, 
though  not  a  man,  became  a  man  to  set  her  free.  His 
adherents,  he  declared,  had  no  need  to  fear  the  lower 
angels  and  powers  which  made  the  world,  but  they 
might  live  as  they  pleased,  and  would  be  saved  by  resting 
their  hopes  on  him  and  on  her.  Later  on  he  is  said  to 
have  gone  to  Rome,  and  to  have  met  with  his  end  in  an 
attempt  to  fiy,  which  was  defeated  by  the  prayers  of 
St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul' 

It  is  clear  that  Simon  Magus  was  not  only  a  here- 
siarch,  but  also  a  false  Christ  or  antichrist.  His  notions 
were  partly  Jewish  and  Alexandrian.  Philo  had  spoken 
of  "  Powers  "  of  God,  of  which  the  greatest  Avas  the 
Logos.  According  to  Jerome,  Simon  used  to  say,  "  I 
am  the  word  of  God,  I  am  beautiful,  I  am  the  Paraclete, 

1  Clem.  Recogn.  ii.  31 ;  Nioeph.  H.  E.  ii.  27. 

2  Iren.  Haer.  i.  23 ;  ii.  9,  and  comp.  Hippol.  Bef.  Haer.  vi.  19 ;  Tert. 
De  Anima,  34- ;  Epiphan.  Haer.  xxv.  4 ;  Tlieodoret,  Haer.  Fab.  i.  1. 

^  Hippolytus  says  that  lie  was  buried — promisiug  to  rise  again  {Mef, 
Haer.  vi.  26) .  As  to  this  legend — which  (as  we  have  seen)  may  have 
sprung  from  the  attempt  of  au  actor  taking  the  part  of  Icarus  (Suet. 
Nei-.  12) — Irenaius,  Tertullian,  and  Ensebius  are  silent.  It  is  found  in 
Arnobius,  adv.  Gent.  ii.  12,  and  with  many  varying  details  in  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions  (vi.  9);  Ambrose  {Hexaem.  iv.  8);  Sulp.  Seveinis  (ii.  41); 
Egesippus  (De  Excid.  Hierosol.  iii.  2),  &c.,  as  well  as  in  Cedrenus, 
Nicephorus,  Glycas,  &c.  I  have  already  alluded  to  the  mistake  which  led 
Justin  Martyr  to  suppose  that  he  was  worshipped  at  Rome  {Apol.  11, 
69,  91 ;  Tert.  Apol.  13). 


CERINTHUS.  347 

I  am  the  Almiglity,  I  am  the  all  things  of  God;"  ^  and 
Irena^us  says  that  he  spoke  of  having  appeared  to  the 
Jews  as  the  Son,  to  the  Samaritans  as  the  Father,  and  to 
the  Gentiles  as  the  Holy  Spirit.  Hippolytus  gives  an 
account  of  his  opinions  from  a  book  called  The  Great 
Announcement  {Apop/tnsis  Megah),  which,  though  it 
can  hardly  be  his,  may  be  supposed  to  express  the 
views  of  his  followers.  The  views  there  stated  resemble 
those  of  the  later  Gnostics  and  Kabbalists.  The  "  In- 
definite Power  "  is  described  as  Fire  and  Silence.  This 
Fire  has  two  natures,  the  source  respectively  of  the 
Intelligible  and  the  Sensible  Universe.  The  world  was 
generated  by  three  pairs  of  roots  or  principles — namely, 
Mind  and  Consciousness,  Voice  and  Name,  Reasoning 
and  Thought;  and  the  Power  in  these  roots  is  manifested 
as  "  he  who  stands,"  or  who  shall  stand — by  which  he 
seems  to  mean  himself  as  the  perfect  man.  It  is  clear 
that  in  these  roots  we  see  the  s^erm  of  the  Gnostic  Aeons 
and  the  Kabbalistic  Sephiroth — the  object  of  which,  like 
that  of  every  Gnostic  system  of  emanations,  was  to 
separate  God  as  far  as  possible  from  man  and  from 
matter.  The  inmost  conception  of  Gnosticism  is  con- 
tradicted— its  very  basis  is  overthrown — by  the  words 
of  St.  John's  Gospel,  "  The  Word  became  flesh." 

h.  The  name  of  Cerinthus  is  less  mixed  up  with 
fantastic  legends ;  but  the  accounts  given  of  his  views 
are  full  of  uncertainty  and  contradiction,  and  seem  to 
show  that  he  was  one  of  those  who  "wavered  like  a 
wave  of  the  sea,"  and  was  tossed  about  by  every  wind 
of  doctrine.  Thus  it  is  that  he  mixed  up  Millenarianism 
and  other   Judaic   elements   with   fancies   which  were 

^  Jer.  in  Matt.  xxiv.  5. 


348  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

afterwards  developed  by  the  most  anti-Judaic  Gnostics.^ 
Thus,  too,  he  has  been  credited  with  the  authorship 
of  the  Apocalj^pse,  though,  in  accordance  with  early 
Church  tradition,  he  was  the  very  teacher  against  whom 
the  later  writings  of  St.  John  were  specially  aimed.^ 

Of  his  personal  life  scarcely  anything  is  known.  It 
is  conjectured  that  he  must  have  been  a  Jew  by  birth, 
but  he  had  evidently  been  trained  in  Egypt,^  and  he  cer- 
tainly taught  in  Asia.  The  name  Merinthus,  which  is 
sometimes  given  him,  is  probably  a  nickname,  since  the 
word  means  "a  cord."  But  even  his  date  is  uncertain. 
He  is  usually  believed  to  have  taught  in  the  old  age  of 
St.  John ;  but  Tertullian  places  him  after  Karpokrates, 
who  did  not  flourish  till  the  reign  of  Hadrian,  a.d.  117. 

His  errors,  as  noticed  by  Irenseus,*  are  as  follows : — 

(1).  He  declared  that  the  world  was  made  by  a 
Virtue  or  Power  far  inferior  to  the  Essential  Divinity. 

(2).  That  the  human  Jesus  was  not  born  of  a  Adrgin, 
but  was  the  son  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  and  that  he  only 
differed  from  men  in  supreme  goodness. 

(3).  That  the  Divine  Christ  only  descended  upon 
Jesus  at  His  baptism  ;  ^  and — 

(4).  That,  when  Jesus  suffered,  the  Divine  Christ 
flew  back  into  His  Pleroma,  being  Himself  incapable  of 
suffering.*^ 

1  The  assertion  of  Philastrius  {Haer.  36)  and  Epiplianius  (Haer.  xxviii. 
2)  that  he  was  the  person  wlio  stirred  up  the  dispute  about  circumcision  at 
Jerusalem  (Acts  ix),  is  an  unelironological  guess. 

-  Jer.  Cat.  Script.  9,  and  so  too  Irenaeus,  &c. 

3  Hippolyt.  Bef.  Haer.  vii.  33 ;  Theodoret,  Haer.  Fab.  ii.  3. 

*  Haer.  i.  26. 

^  This  view  was  afterwards  elaborated  by  Bardesanes.  Valentinus,  on 
the  otlier  hand,  tauglit  that  the  body  of  Christ  was  celestial,  but  merely 
passed  through  the  Virgin  Avithout  partaking  of  her  nature. 

"  Epiplianius  and   Tlieodoret  repeat   this   testimony  of  Irenanis,  and 


CERINTHUS.  349 

Besides  these  errors,  he  is  said  to  have  regarded 
Jesus  as  a  teacher  only,  not  as  a  redeemer ;  to  have  re- 
jected the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul ;  and  to  have  sanctioned 
the  practice  of  being  baptised  for  the  dead. 

Even  from  these  glimpses  we  can  see  that  he  did  not 
exactly  deny  the  Divinity  of  Christ.  The  first  who  is 
said  to  have  done  this  was  Theodotus  of  Byzantium.^ 
But  Cerinthus  was  evidently  actuated  by  the  Grnostic 
desire  to  remove  as  far  as  possible  the  notion  of  any  con- 
tact, much  more  any  intercommunion,  between  God  and 
Matter.  Now,  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Incarna- 
tion cut  at  the  root  of  the  Alexandrian  and  Grnostic 
fancies  that  Matter  was  evil,  and  that  God  was  so  infi- 
nitely removed  from  man  that  he  could  hold  no  imme- 
diate communion  with  him.  It  was  the  fatal  system  of 
Dualism  which  led  to  so  many  heresies.  It  was  the 
cause  of  Ebionism,  which  denied  Christ's  Divinity  al- 
together ;  of  Docetism,  which  maintained  that  the  body 
of  Jesus  was  purely  phantasmal  and  unreal ;  ^  and  it 
probably  lay  at  the  base  of  Nestorianism,  which  lost 
sight  of  the  indivisible  union  of  the  human  and  the 
Divine  in  the  one  God-man.  Cerinthus,  like  other 
Gnostics  of   Egyptian  training,  denied  the   hypostatic 

say  that  Cerinthus  attributed  the  miracles  of  Jesus  to  Christ,  whom  he 
represented  as  identical  with  the  Holy  Spirit.  Jesus  was  to  Cerinthus 
only  "  the  earthly  Christ,"  or  "the  Christ  below"  (o  Kdrw  XpKrrds),  while 
the  Divine  Chi-ist  was  "  the  Christ  above  "  (o  &voii  XplcttSs). 

1  Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  28. 

2  Clemens  of  Alexandria  (Strom,  iii.  13)  ascribes  the  invention  of 
Docetism  to  Julias  Cassianus,  A.D.  173,  but  it  is  clear  that  the  germs  of  it 
existed  long  before,  and  are  even  found,  as  Hippolytus  says  (Ref.  Haer.  vi. 
14),  in  Simon  Magus.  It  was  taught  in  the  Apocryjilial  Gospel  of 
Peter  (Euseb.  H.  E.  vi.  23),  which  was  pei-haps  forged  by  Leucius,  a 
disciple  of  Marcion,  about  A.r.  140.  The  Docetae  were  also  called 
Phautasiasts  and  Opinarians. 


r>0  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

and  eternal  union  of  the  two  natures  in  Christ.  He 
tauiG^ht  that  Christ  alone  was  the  Son  of  God,  and  that 
until  His  baptism,  and  at  His  crucifixion,  Jesus  was  an 
ordinary  man.  In  the  one  pregnant  expression  of  St. 
John,  he  "  loosed  "  or  "  disintegrated  Jesus."  ^ 

Views  essentially  similar  to  these  are  found  in  all 
the  Gnostic  systems.'  They  all  sprang  from  speculations 
about  the  origin  of  evil,  and  about  the  method  of 
bridging  over  the  chasm  between  absolute  and  finite 
being.  Since  they  identified  evil  with  matter,  they  led 
at  once  to  a  Manichean  dualism  ;  and  it  was  only  by  in- 
venting elaborate  series  of  hermaphrodite  pairs  of  aeons 
or  emanations  that  they  could  imagine  any  communica- 
tion of  God's  will  to  man.^  They  were  all  influenced 
by  the  Platonised  Judaism  of  Philo  ^  and  the  Alexan- 
drians, as  well  as  by  Persian  and  other  Oriental  elements 
of  thought.^    But  the  deadliness  of  their  system  revealed 

1  See  infra,  p.  448. 

-  The  iiaiiie  Gnostic — "  one  who  knows  " — was  first  adopted  by  tlie 
Naasseues  or  O^'hites,  "  alleging  that  they  alone  knew  the  depths  "  (Hii)pol. 
Haer.  v.  61.  Irenseus  [ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  7)  calls  Karpokrates  "the 
father  of  the  li(;resy  which  is  called  that  of  the  Gnostics  "  (comp.  id.  Haer. 
i.  :j5,  6 ;  see  Lipsius,  Gnosticismus,  p.  48).  The  original  sources  for  tlie 
history  of  Gnosticism  are  to  be  found  in  Irenaeus  [adv.  Haereses),  Ter- 
tuUian  (adv.  Marcionem,  De  Fraescr.  Haereticomm,  and  Scorpiace), 
Epiphaiiins  (adv.  TIaereses),  and  passages  of  Clemens  Alex,  and  Origeu, 
and  Hippolytus  Philosophumena.  For  modern  treatises  see  Beausobre 
(JHst.  du  3Ianic]tri.'ime),  Matter  {Hist,  du  Gnosticisvie), 'Burton  {Inquiry 
into  Heresies  of  the  Apostolic  Age),  Mansel  (Gnostic  Heresies),  and  Baur 
I  Die  Christ.  Gliosis).  See  too  Milman,  History  of  Christianity,  ii.  68 ; 
Robertson,  Ch.  Hist.  i.  31;  Neander,  Ch.  Hist.  ii.  82;  Gieseler,  Ch. 
Hist.  i.  114;  Burton,  Bampt.  Lect.  iv.,  &c.  Later  treatises  are  Ad. 
Harnack,  Quellen  d.  Gesch.  d.  Gnost.  (1873) ;  Lipsius,  Quellen  d.  alt. 
Ketzergeseh.  1875. 

'  So  Plato,  in  the  Timaeus,  said  that  it  was  the  function  of  the  subor- 
dinate gods  "  to  weave  the  mortal  to  the  immortal." 

*  "  Hacreticorum  ]>atriarc]iae  philosophi "  (Tert.  adv.  Hennog.  8); 
"  Plafo  omnium  haereticorum  condimontarius  "  (l)e  Anim.  23). 

^  Some  of  the  Gnostics  referred  to  Zoroaster.    Porphyr.  Vit.  Plotin.  10. 


GERMS    OF    GNOSTICISM.  351 

itself  in  many  and  in  opposite  forms.  It  exalted  an 
imaginary  knowledge  above  a  pure  and  unsophisticated 
faith.  It  mistook  a  terminology  for  a  creed.  It 
confused  a  manipulation  of  words  with  a  removal  of 
difficulties.  It  puffed  up  its  followers  with  an  inflated 
sense  that  they  were  an  intellectual  aristocracy,  pos- 
sessed of  an  esoteric  teaching  which  elevated  them  far 
above  their  simple  brethren.  The  doctrine  of  the 
inherent  evil  of  matter,  and  the  confusion  of  "  the 
body"  with  "  the  flesh,"  drove  the  Gnostics  either  into 
an  extravagant  ascetism,  which  destroyed  the  body 
without  controlling  it,  or  into  Antinomian  license, 
which  destroyed  it  in  the  opposite  way  by  shameful 
self-indulgence.  This  they  excused  either  on  the  plea 
that  to  the  true  Gnostic  the  spiritual  was  everything, 
and  that  anything  which  his  body  did  was  of  no 
moment,  since  it  did  not  affect  his  true  self;  or  by 
arguing  that  the  moral  law  was  only  the  work  of  the 
evil  or  inferior  Demiurge.^  In  both  extremes  they 
confused  the  true  nature  of  sin,  turned  religion  and 
morality  into  curious  questions,  placed  salvation  in 
systems  of  metaphysics,  and  by  vain  speculation  and 
verbal  analyses  lost  sight  of  the  practical  answer  which 
Christianity  had  given  to  all  the  deepest  problems  of 
human  life. 

These  errors  existed  in  their  germs  from  a  very 
early  period.  We  often  hear  the  voice  of  St.  Paul 
raised  in  warning  respecting  them,  especially  in  the 
Epistles  to  the  Colossians  and  Ephesians,  and  in  the 
later    Epistles.        Against    their    Antinomian    develop- 

^  Clemens  Alex.   {Strom,  iii.    p.   529)   poiuts    out  that  tliey   tauglit 
extravagant  asceticism     {inrtprovov    tyKpareiav),    or  moral    iuditt'erentism 

\a.^ia<p6pws  Cv*')- 


352  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

ments  we  have  the  strong  denunciations  of  St.  Jude. 
But  St.  John  Uved  at  a  time  when  they  had  acquired 
a  more  definite  consistency.  He  saw  and  he  declared 
that  all  of  them  began  or  ended  with  a  denial  of  Christ, 
or  with  errors  as  to  His  nature.  He  discountenanced 
alike  their  exaggerated  spirituality  and  the  carnality 
into  which  it  passed.  He  erected  a  bulwark  against 
them  all  in  those  inspired  words  which  contain  the 
essence  of  all  the  truths  which  are  most  precious  to 
Christianity,  and  which  form  the  Prologues  of  his 
Gospel  and  First  Epistle.  He  regards  them  all  as 
forms  of  Antichrist.  He  who  denies  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ  the  Son  of  God — in  other  words,  who  asserts, 
as  Cerinthus  did,  that  the  historical  Man  Jesus  was 
not  in  the  fullest  sense  Divine — is  an  Antichrist  in  a 
far  different  sense  than  Nero  was,  and  yet  in  a  true 
sense.  St.  John  tells  us  this  in  his  usual  way,  both 
positively  and  negatively.^  He  tells  us  that  Jesus  is 
the  Christ,  and  the  Son  of  God,  and  that  the  Divine 
Eternal  Being  tabernacled  in  human  flesh. ^  He  says, 
in  every  possible  form  of  words,  that  Jesus  is  Christ ; 
that  Christ  is  Jesus ;  that  Jesus  is  Divine — that  Jesus 
is  not  a  separate  being  from  the  Son  of  God,  but  indis- 
tinguishable from  Him.  The  Gnostics  made  the  Divine 
"come  and  go  to  Jesus  like  a  bird  through  the  air,"  but 
St.  John  testifies  throughout  Gospel  and  Epistles,  as 
he  had  also  done,  though  with  less  absolute  distinctness, 
in  the  Apocalypse,  that  the  Divine  became  Human,  and 
dwelt  in  our  Humanity  indivisibly.^  The  Eternal  Son 
of  God  not  only  filled  the  whole  person  of  Jesus,  which 

1  1  John  ii.  18.  22;  iv.  3,  15;  v.  1,  10. 

»  1  John  iv.  2,  3  ;  2  Jolm  7. 

*  See  Kcim,  Jvsu  von  Nazara,  Introd.  II.  C 


THE   FULNESS   OF  CHRIST.  353 

is  Himself,  but  also  filled  all  believers — who  are  born  of 
aod,  not  of  "  the  will  of  the  flesh."  He  fills  all  life  and 
death  and  resurrection  with  Divine  life  and  glory.  Yet 
^vhile  thus  protesting  alike  against  Psilanthropia — the 
Ebionite  doctrine  that  Christ  was  a  mere  man — and 
asrainst  Docetism,  and  agfainst  the  Hualistic  theories 
of  incipient  Manichees,  and  against  all  severing  of  the 
Person  of  Jesus  into  a  Man  who  is  not  God,  or  a  God 
who  refuses  to  be  a  man — he  at  the  same  time  makes  it 
clear  that  he  does  not  identify  religion  with  orthodoxy, 
but  places  true  religion  in  love  to  God  shown  by  love 
to  man.  The  self-satisfaction  of  a  supercilious  ortho- 
doxy which  might  at  any  time  soar  into  Pharisaic 
asceticism,  or  sink  into  reckless  immorality,  is  confronted 
with  the  assurance — Oh  that  in  all  ages  the  Christian 
Church  had  better  understood  it,  and  taken  it  more 
deeply  to  heart ! — that  "  he  who  saith  I  know  God, 
and  keepeth  not  His  commandments,"  were  he  ten- 
times-over  orthodox  in  his  asserted  knowledge,  is  yet 
"a  liar,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  him  ;"^  and  that  "  he 
who  loveth  not,  knoweth  not  God ;  for  God  is  love."^ 

1  1  John  ii.  4.  2  i  John  iv.  8. 


a? 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 

LATER    WRITINGS    OF    ST.    JOHN. 

"  Sumtis  pennis  aquilse  et  ad  altiora  festinaus  de  Verbo  Dei  dispu- 
tat." — Jek.  ad  Matt.,  Proem. 

"  Trauscendit  nubes,  trauscendit  virtutes  coeloriim,  transcendit  augelos, 
et  Verhum  inprincipio  repperit." — Ambros.  Prol.  in  Luc. 

Apart  from  its  own  beauty  and  importance,  the  Epistle 
of  St.  John   derives  a  special  interest   from   the   fact 
that  it  is  the  latest  utterance  of  AjDostolic  inspiration. 
It  is  addressed  to  Churches  which  by  the  close  of  the 
first  century  had  advanced  to  a  point  of  development 
far   beyond    that    contemplated    by   St.    Paul    in    his 
earlier   Epistles.       Many  of  the    old   questions   which 
had    raged    between     Judaisers     and    Paulinists    had 
vanished    into    the   back-ground.       The     Gospel    had 
spread  far  and  wide.     It  had  become  self-evident  that 
nothing   could   be   more   futile    than  to   confine  those 
waters  of  the  River  of  God  in  the  narrow  chaunels  of 
Jewish   particularism.       The    fall    of    Jerusalem    had 
illuminated   as    with    a   liohtnin^   flash    the    darkness 
of  obstinacy  and  prejudice.     It  had  proved  the  inade- 
quacy of  the  Pharisaic  ideal  of  "  righteousness,"   and 
the   ignorance   of  the   system  which  proclaimed  itself 
to   be   the    only  orthodoxy.       The   liberty   for   which 
St.  Paul  had  battled  all  his  life  long  against  storms  of 
hatred    and    of    persecution,    had    now    been    finally 
achieved.     St.  John  himself  had  advanced  to  a  stand- 


FRESH  QUESTIONS.  355 

point  of  knowledge  far  beyond  that  of  the  days  when 
he  had  lived  among  the  Elders  of  the  Church  which 
was  dominated  by  the  views  and  example  of  St.  James. 
He  had  learnt  the  full  meaning  of  those  words  of  the 
Lord  to  the  woman  of  Samaria,  that  the  day  should 
come  in  which  men  should  worship  the  Father  neither 
on  Grerizim  or  in  Jerusalem  but  everywhere,  and  accept- 
ably, if  they  worshipped  in  spirit  and  in  truth.  On 
the  other  hand,  new  and  dangerous  errors  had  arisen. 
Christianity  had  come  into  contact  with  Greek  philo- 
sophy and  Eastern  speculation.  Men  were  no  longer 
interested  in  such  questions  as  whether  they  need  be 
circumcised ;  or  to  what  extent  their  consciences  need 
be  troubled  by  distinctions  between  clean  or  unclean 
meats ;  or  whether  they  were  to  place  the  authority 
of  James  or  Kephas  above  that  of  Paul ;  or  what  was 
the  real  position  to  be  assigned  to  the  gift  of  tongues ; 
or  whether  the  dead  in  Christ  were  to  lose  any  of  the 
advantages  which  would  be  granted  at  His  second 
return  to  the  living.  All  such  questions  had  received 
their  solution  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  Christians 
as  a  body  were  by  this  time  fully  acquainted  with  his 
arguments,  and  acquiesced  in  them  all  the  more  un- 
hesitatingly because  they  had  been  stamped  with 
irrefragable  sanction  by  the  course  of  History.  All 
men  could  see  the  rejection  of  the  once  chosen  people. 
Far  different  were  the  questions  which  now  agitated 
the  minds  of  Christian  thinkers.  They  were  questions 
of  a  more  abstract  character,  relating  above  all  to  the 
nature  of  Christ.  Was  He,  as  the  Ebionites  main- 
tained, a  mere  man?  Was  He,  as  Cerinthus  argued, 
a  twofold  personality,  the  Eternal  Christ  and  the  sinless 
Jesus,  united  only  between  the  Baptism  and  the  Cruci- 
X  2 


356  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

fixion?^  Or,  was  He,  again,  as  the  intellectual  pre- 
cursors of  the  Doceta?  were  beginning  to  suggest,  a 
man  in  semblance  only — who  had  but  lived  in  the 
phantasm  of  an  earthly  life?  Nay  more,  men  were 
beginning  to  speculate  about  the  nature  of  God  Him- 
self. Could  God  be  regarded  as  the  author  of  evil? 
Must  it  not  be  supposed,  as  the  Manichees  subsequently 
argued,  that  there  were  two  Gods — one  the  supreme 
and  illimitable  Deity  belonging  to  regions  infinitely 
above  "  the  smoke  and  stir  of  this  dim  spot  which  m.en 
call  earth,"  the  other  a  limited  and  imperfect  Demiurge? 
Again,  what  was  the  relation  between  these  questions 
and  the  duties  of  daily  life  ?  Christians  were  free 
from  the  Law ;  that  was  a  truth  which  St.  Paul  had 
proved.  But  was  there  any  fundamental  distinction 
between  the  authority  on  which  rested  the  ceremonial 
and  the  moral  law  ?  Might  they  not  regard  them- 
selves as  free  from  the  rules  of  morality,  as  well  as 
from  the  routine  of  Levitism  ?  Was  not  faith  enough  ? 
If  men  believed  rightly  on  God  and  on  His  Son  Jesus 
Christ,  would  He  greatly  care  as  to  how  they  lived? 
So  argued  the  Antinomians,  and  many  of  them  were 
prepared  to  carry  their  arguments  from  theory  into 
practice.  Such,  then,  were  the  errors  which  it  became 
the  special  mission  of  St.  John  to  counteract. 

But  he  does  not  counteract  them  controversially. 
The  method  of  Pauline  dialectics  was  entirely  unsuited 
to  his  habit  of  mind.  That  method  in  its  due  time 
and  place  was  absolutely  necessary.  It  met  the  doubts 
of  men  in  the  intellectual  region  in  which  they  had 
originated.     It  broke  down  their  objections  with  the 

^  Iren.  Haer.  xi.  7.     "  Qui  autom  Josum  separant  a  Christo  et  impas- 
sibilem  perseverasse  Christum,  passom  vero  Jesum  dicunt  .  .  ." 


METHOD   OF  ST.   JOHN.  357 

same  weapons  by  which  they  had  been  maintained. 
But  when  that  work  was  done  there  was  another  way 
to  bring  home  the  truth  to  the  conviction  of  the  uni- 
versal Church.  It  was  by  witness,  by  spiritual  appeal, 
by  the  statement  of  personal  experience,  by  the  lofty 
language  of  inspired  authority.  Hence  the  method 
which  St.  John  adopts  is  not  polemical  but  irenical. 
He  overthrows  error  by  the  irresistible  presentation 
of  counter  truths.  In  the  Grospel,  as  Keim  says, 
he  counteracted  heresy  thetically,  in  the  Epistles  anti- 
thetically ;  in  other  words,  in  the  Gospel  he  lays  down 
positive  truths,  in  the  Epistles  he  states  those  truths 
in  sharp  contrast  with  the  opposing  errors.  To  those 
who  moved  in  the  atmosphere  of  controversy  "  diffi- 
culties" loomed  large  and  portentous  all  around  the 
doctrines  of  the  Church.  St.  John  dealt  with  those 
difficulties  from  a  region  so  elevated  and  serene  that 
to  all  who  reached  his  point  of  view  they  shrank  into 
insignificance.  At  the  heights  whence  he  gazed 
men  might  learn  to  see  the  grandeur  of  the  ocean, 
and  to  think  little  of  the  billows,  and  nothing  of  the 
ripples  upon  its  surface.  Hence  it  has  been  a  true 
Christian  instinct  which  has  assigned  to  St.  John  the 
symbol  of  "  the  eagle,"  in  the  four-fold  cherub  of 
the  Gospel-chariot.  The  eagle  which  sails  in  the 
azure  deep  of  air  "  does  not  worry  itself  how  to  cross 
the  streams."  Dante,  in  the  Paradiso,  showed  no  little 
insight  when  he  called  him  "  Christ's  own  eagle,"  and 
when  he  describes  the  outlines  of  his  form  as  lost  in  the 
dazzling  light  by  which  he  is  encircled.  "  The  central 
characteristic  of  his  nature  is  intensity — intensity  of 
thought,  word,  insight,  life.  He  regards  everything  on 
its  divine  side.     For  him  the  eternal  is  already  .... 


358  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

He  sees  the  past  and  the  future  gathered  up  in  the 
manifestation  of  the  Son  of  God.  This  was  the  one 
fact  in  wliich  the  hope  of  the  world  lay.  Of  this  he 
had  himself  heen  assured  by  the  evidence  of  sense  and 
thought.  This  he  was  constrained  to  proclaim  :  *  We 
have  seen  and  do  testify.'  He  had  no  laboured  process 
to  go  through ;  he  saw.  He  had  no  constructive  proof 
to  develop  ;  he  bore  witness.  His  source  of  knowledge 
was  direct,  and  his  mode  of  bringing  conviction  was  to 
affirm."  ^  His  whole  style  and  tone  of  thought  is  that 
of  "the  bosom  disciple."^ 

Thus  then  the  one  consummate  truth  which  St. 
John  had  to  offer  to  the  gathering  doubts  and  per- 
plexities of  all  unfaithful  hearts  was  the  Incarnation  of 
the  Divine.  This  is  the  central  object  of  all  faith. 
This  is  the  one  counteraction  of  all  unbelief. 

And  by  the  manner  in  which  he  set  forth  this 
truth — by  this  presentation  to  the  world  of  "  the 
spiritual  Gospel  "^ — he  at  once  obeyed  the  di\dne  im- 
pulse of  inspiration  which  came  to  him,  and  met  the 
natural  wishes  which  the  Church  had  earnestly  ex- 
pressed. The  tradition  which  records  that  he  was 
urged  to  write  his  Gospel  by  the  Elders  and  Bishops 
of  the  Church,^  is  one  which  has  every  mark  of  pro- 
bability.    The  generation  of  the  Apostles  was  rapidly 

'  Wcstcott,  St.  John,  p.  xxxy. 

'  This  title  {S  iirta-Trieios)  was  given  to  St.  John  as  early  as  the  second 
century.  It  is  found  {6  «irl  rb  crT7j6os  tov  Kvpi6v  d.vairiff(S>v)  in  Polycrates, 
Bp.  of  Ephesus  (see  Routh,  Bel.  Sacr.  i.  15,  37,  370)  and  Iren.  c.  Haer. 
iii.  1,  1. 

•''  Clem.  Alex.  ap.  Euseb.  E.  E.  vi.  14. 

*  "  Impelled  by  his  friends  "  (Clem.  Alex.  I.  c).  The  legend  is,  that 
on  being  requested  to  write  the  Gospel,  ho  asked  the  Ephesian  elders  to 
join  him  in  fasting,  and  then  suddenly  exclaimed,  as  if  inspired,  "  In  the 
l)oginniug  was  the  Word  "  ( Jer.  de  Virr.  lUustr.  29).  Irenaeus  only  says 
that  he  was  asked  to  write  the  Gospel  [Ilaer.  iii.  1). 


NEED  FOE,  THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL.        359 

passing  away.     St.  John  had  now  long  exceeded  the 
ordinary  limits  of  human  age.      The  day  would   very 
soon  come  when  not  a  single  human  being  could  say 
of   the  Lord  "I   saw."     But   he  could   still   say  this; 
he  had    not    only    seen    and    heard   and    gazed    upon 
and   handled  the  Word    of    Life,   but    had  even  been 
the  beloved  disciple    of  the  Son  of  Man.      The   facts 
of  the   life  of  Jesus  had   been  recorded  by  the  three 
Synoptists.     What   the   world   now  needed  was  some 
guide   into   the   full   and   unspeakable    significance   of 
those  facts.     Who  was  so  fit  to  give  it  as  St.  John? 
nay,  who  besides  him  was  even  capable  of  giving  it  with 
authority?     He  had  hitherto  written  nothing  but  the 
Apocalypse.     The  Apocalypse  had  indeed  depicted  the 
glory  of  the  Eternal  Christ,  but  it  was  a  book  of  pe- 
culiar character ;  it  was  full  of  symbols  ;  it  was  difficult 
of  interpretation ;    it   was  based  on  the  imagery  and 
prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament ;  it  was  full  of  storm 
and  stress.     It  was  the  Book  of  Battle,  the  Book  of 
the  Wars  of  the  Lord ;    it  portrayed  the  struggles  of 
the  Church  with  the  hostile  forces  of  the  Jewish  and 
Grentile  world ;  and  its  celestial  visions  were  interposed 
between  scenes  of  judgment, 

"  As  when  some  mighty  painter  dips 
His  pencil  in  the  hues  of  earthquake  and  eclipse." 

There  were,  moreover,  many  Christian  doctrines  on 
which  the  Apocalypse  did  not  touch,  and,  above  all,  it 
had  been  written  before  that  divine  event  which  had 
evidently  been  the  beginning  of  a  new  epoch  in  the 
history  of  Christianity.  In  the  final  removal  of  the 
candlestick  of  Judaism,  the  Christian  Church  had 
rightly  seen  the  primary  fulfilment  of  those  prophecies 


360  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITr. 

which  had  spoken   of   the  Immediate  Coming  of   the 
Lord. 

To  all  the  living  members  of  the  Church,  that  stu- 
pendous event  had  set  the  Seal  of  God  to  the  revelation 
of  the  New  Covenant.  It  was  the  obvious  close  of  the 
epoch  which  had  begun  at  Sinai.  It  was  the  extinction 
of  the  Aaronic  in  order  to  establish  the  Melchizedek 
Priesthood.  It  had  rendered  the  system  of  Jewish 
sacrifices  impossible,  in  order  to  show  that  the  one  true 
sacrifice  had  now  once  for  all  been  offered.  It  had  been 
the  burning  desecration  of  the  sin-stained  Temple  in  order 
that  men  might  see  in  the  Church  of  God  the  new  and 
spiritual  Jerusalem  which  had  no  need  of  any  temple 
therein,  because  the  body  of  every  true  believer  was 
the  spiritual  temj)le  of  the  one  God.  But  to  St.  John 
especially  that  event  had  come  as  with  a  burst  of  light. 
It  had  been,  perhaps,  the  greatest  step  since  the  death 
of  Christ  in  that  education  for  the  sake  of  which  his 
life  had  been  so  long  preserved.  The  oral  teaching  of 
the  Apostle  must  have  been  sufficient  to  show  that  the 
gradual  revelation  which  had  so  long  been  going  on 
within  him  had  now  reached  its  fulness.  The  light 
which  had  begun  to  pulse  in  the  Eastern  sky  over  the 
banks  of  Jordan  had  shone  more  and  more  towards  the 
perfect  day.  AVas  this  teaching  to  be  lost  to  the  world 
for  ever?  Was  it  only  to  be  entrusted  to  the  shifting 
imperfections  of  oral  tradition  ?  Was  it  to  be  but  half- 
apprehended  by  the  simplicity,  or  misrepresented  by 
the  limitations,  of  such  men  as  Papias  and  Irena}us  ? 
IIow  little  had  the  Synoptists  detailed  respecting  the 
Juda3an  ministry  of  which  St.  John  so  often  spoke  ! 
They  had  not  recorded  the  earliest  call  of  the  Disciples, 
nor   the  raising  of  Lazarus,    nor   the    washing  of  the 


TEACHING  OF  ST.   JOHN.  361 

Apostles'  feet.  They  had  reported  some  of  the  public 
sermons  of  Jesus,  but  they  had  not  preserved  any  me- 
morial of  such  private  discourses  as  that  to  Nicodemus 
and  the  woman  of  Samaria,  or  as  those  divine  farewells 
delivered  at  the  Last  Supper.  Nor,  again,  had  they 
spoken  of  Christ's  pra3-existence  ;  nor  had  they  used  that 
title  of  "  the  Word,"  which  was  now  so  frequently  on 
the  lips  of  St.  John,  and  to  which  he  gave  such  pregnant 
significance  ;  nor  did  they  furnish  a  final  insight  into 
the  two  natures  in  the  one  Person  of  the  Son  of  Man, 

It  was  true  indeed,  as  the  Elders  and  Bishops  who 
urged  their  request  upon  St.  John  would  at  once  have 
admitted,  that  as  regards  the  divinity  and  atoning  work 
of  Christ,  the  knowledge  of  the  Church  had  been  greatly 
widened  and  systematised  by  the  teachings  of  St.  Paul. 
He  had  brought  into  clear  light  the  truth  that  Jesus 
was  not  only  the  Messiah  of  the  Jews,  the  Prophet, 
Priest,  and  King,  but  that  He  was  the  incarnate  Son 
of  Grod,  the  eternal  Saviour  of  the  World ;  that  only 
by  faith  in  Him  could  we  be  justified;  that  the  true 
life  of  the  believer  is  merged  in  absolute  union  with 
Him ;  and  that  because  He  has  risen  we  also  shall  rise. 

Yet  none  could  have  listened  to  St.  John  in  his 
latter  years  without  feeling  that,  while  he  accepted  the 
doctrines  of  St.  Paul,  he  had  himself,  in  the  course  of  a 
longer  life,  enjoyed  more  of  that  teaching  which  comes 
to  us  from  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the  lessons  of  History. 
Whilst  he  gave  no  new  commandment,  and  had  no 
new  revelation  to  announce,  he  yet  stamped  with  the 
impress  of  finality  the  great  truths  Avhich  St.  Paul  had 
taught.  There  is  not  a  single  doctrine  in  the  writings 
of  St.  John  which  may  not  be  found  implicitly  and 
even  explicitly  in  the  writings  of  St.  Paul ;  and  j^et — 


362  THE    EARLY   DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

to  give  but  two  instances  out  of  many — the  Church 
would  have  been  indefinitely  the  loser  had  she  not 
received  the  inheritance  of  sayings  so  supreme,  so  clear, 
and  so  final  as  these  of  St.  John, — 

"  Tlie  Father  sent  His  Son  to  he  the  Saviour  of  the 
world''  and 

"  We  are  in  Him  that  is  true,  even  in  His  Son  Jesus 
Christ.     This  is  the  true  God  and  eternal  life!'  ^ 

No  one,  again,  had  yet  uttered  such  clear  words 
respecting  the  Divinity  and  Humanity  indissolubly  yet 
distinctly  united  in  the  Person  of  Christ  as  those  which 
are  contained  in  the  Prologue  to  the  Gospel  and  the 
opening  address  of  the  Epistle,  and  which  are  con- 
centrated in  the  four  words,  "  The  Word  became  Flesh." 
No  one  had  so  briefly  summarised  the  Atoning  and 
Mediatorial  work  of  Christ,  as,  ''He  is  the  Projntiation'^ 
for  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours  oiily  hut  also  for  the  JVliole 
World!" 

Indeed,  as  they  listened  to  the  white-haired  Apostle, 
men  must  have  felt  that  there  was  something  in  his 
manner  of  exposition  which  tended  to  remove  all 
difficulties,  to  solve  all  apparent  antinomies.  Take, 
for  instance,  the  apparent  contradiction  between 
the  terms  used  by  St.  Paul  and  St.  James  as  to 
Righteousness  by  Faith  and  Righteousness  by  Works. 
AVould  it  not  cease  to  be  a  difficulty — was  not  the 
controversy  lifted  to  a  •  higher  region — when  they 
heard  such  words  as,  "  He  that  doeth  righteousness  is 
righteous,  even  as  He  is  righteous,"  in  connexion  with 
"  IFJioso  keepefh  His  Word,  in  them  verity  is  the  love  of 
God  perfected^  and  every  one  that  doeth  righteousness  is 

'  1  John,  V.  20. 

-  1  John  ii.  2  ;  l\aa^i6s,  a  tiniqiie  expression  of  St.  John. 


TEACHING  OF  ST.  JOHN".  363 

horn  of  Him  ;  "  and,  "  BeJiold  what  and  hoiv  great  love  God 
hath  given  us  that  we  should  be  called  the  children  of  God"? 
Or,  again,  if  men  felt  the  difficulties  which  rise  from  the 
forensic  and  sacrificial  aspects  of  the  Atonement,  how- 
would  they  feel  that  the  forgiveness  in  the  Court,  and 
the  cleansing  in  the  Temple,  was  simplified  when  it  was 
mingled  with  the  thoughts  of  the  perfection  of  our 
sonship  in  union  with  the  Son  of  God,  and  indicated  in 
terms  so  sublimely  final  as, 

"  If  we  say  that  ive  have  no  sin  we  deceive  ourselves, 
and  the  truth  is  not  in  us.  But  if  lue  confess  our  sins, 
God  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgive  us  our  sins  and  to 
cleanse  ics  from  all  unrighteousness  "  ? 

The  expressions  of  the  New  Testament  which  de- 
scribe the  privileges  of  the  Christian  estate  fall  into 
three  classes,  of  which  one  revolves  around  the  word 
Righteousness;  another  round  the  word  Sonship;  a 
third  around  metaphors  expressive  of  Sacrifice.  Now 
let  the  reader  study  the  First  Epistle  of  St,  John, 
from  ii.  29  to  iii.  5,  and  he  will  find  the  order  there — 
Righteousness  (ii.  29),  Sonship  (iii.  1),  Sanctification 
(iii.  2 — 5) ;  but  the  three  are  one.  The  terms  of  the 
Court,  the  Household,  and  the  Temple  confirm  and  illus- 
trate each  other.  Jesus  Christ — the  Righteous,  the 
Son  of  the  Father,  the  Holy  One — presides,  in  the 
glory  of  His  holiness,  over  all  and  over  each.^ 

1  I  owe  this  thought  to  Dr.  Pope's  excellent  Introductiou  to  liis  trans- 
lation of  Haupt's  First  Epistle  of  St.  John,  p.  xxxi. 


CHAPTER    XXXII. 

THE    STAMP    OF    FINALITY    ON    THE    WRITINGS    OF    ST.    JOHN. 

"  Aquila  ipse  est  Johannes,  sul)limium  prsedicator,  et  lucis  intemae 
jitqiie  aeteruBB  fixis  oculis  coutemplator." — Aug.  in  Joh.,  Tract.  36. 

It  is  in  waj^s  like  these — by  the  use  of  expressions 
at  once  larger  and  simpler,  more  comprehensive  and 
more  easily  intelligible ;  expressions  which  transcend 
controversy  because  they  are  the  synthesis  of  the  com- 
plementary truths  which  controversy  forces  into  antithesis 
— that  St.  John,  the  last  writer  of  the  New  Testament,  in 
traversing  the  whole  field  of  Christian  theology,  sets  the 
seal  of  perfection  on  all  former  doctrine.  This  is  exactly 
what  we  should  have  desired  to  find  in  the  last  treatises 
of  inspired  revelation.  And  one  remarkable  peculiarity 
of  his  method  is  that  he  indicates  the  deepest  truths 
even  respecting  those  points  of  doctrine  on  which  he 
does  not  specifically  dwell.  Thus,  he  does  not  dwell  on 
the  explanation  (if  the  term  may  be  allowed)  of  Christ's 
Atonement ;  he  does  not  offer  any  theory  as  to  the 
reason  for  the  necessity  or  efficacy  of  Christ's  death  ;  yet 
lie  involves  all  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  and  of  Apollos 
in  the  words,  that  "  Christ  is  the  propitiation  for  our 
sins  and  for  the  whole  world,"  and  that  "  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin."  He  does  not 
use  the  words  "  mediator  between  God  and  man,"  but 
he  sets  forth,  with  a  clearness  never  before  attained, 
that  our  mediator  is  God  and  Man.     He  does  not  con- 


FINALITY   OF   ST.   JOHN.  365 

trast  God's  love  with  His  justice,  but  lie  shows  that 
love  and  propitiation  were  united  in  the  antecedent  will 
of  God.  He  does  not  work  out  the  details  of  Christ- 
ology,  but  he  so  pervades  his  Gospel  and  Epistle  with 
the  thought  that  "  the  Word  was  God,"  and  that 
"  without  Him  was  not  anything  made  that  was  made,"^ 
as  to  produce  a  Christological  impression,  sublimer  even 
than  that  which  we  derive  from  the  Epistles  to  the 
Ephesians  and  the  Colossians.  He  does  not  dwell  on 
the  sacraments,  and  yet  in  his  few  words  on  the  witness 
of  the  Water,  and  on  the  Bread  of  Life,  he  brings  out 
their  deepest  significance.  He  does  not  develop  the 
reasons  for  the  rejection  of  the  Chosen  People,  after  the 
grandeur  of  their  past  mission  ;  but  he  illustrates  both 
no  less  fully  than  the  Epistles  to  the  Eomans  and  the 
Hebrews,  when,  in  his  Gospel,  he  contrasts,  step  by 
step,  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  with  the  faith  of  the  dis- 
ciples, and  yet  records  the  expression  of  Christ's  eulogy 
"  an  Israelite  indeed."  He  records  Christ's  saying  to  the 
woman  of  Samaria,  that  salvation — the  salvation  of 
which  all  the  Prophets  had  spoken — was  from  the  Jews;^ 
and,  in  his  own  words,  he  writes  of  Christ's  coming  to 
the  Jews  as  a  coming  to  "  His  own  people  and  His 
own  house."^  Once  more,  St.  John  nowhere  enters  into 
any  formal  statements  about  the  Triune  God;  yet  in 
whose  writings  do  we  see  more  fully  than  in  his  the 
illustration  of  St.  Augustine's  saying,  "Ubi  amor  ibi 
Trinitas,''  when  we  hear  him  say  that  "  God  is  Love," 
and   that  "  God   is  Light ; "    and   that   in   Christ  was 


*  "These  ■words,  taken  in   their  widest  significance,  constitute   the 
signature  of  the  Johannaean  writings  "  (Haupt). 
^  John  iv.  22,  ri  crcoTripla  e/c  tuu  'lovSaieuy  iffriv. 
2  John  i,  11,  01  5f5(o«  ...  to  X^ia.     Corap.  John  xix.  27. 


366  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Light,  and  that  Light  was  the  Life  of  Men ;  and  that 
all  Christians  have  an  Unction  from  the  Holy  One,  and 
that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  Spirit  of  Christ  ? 

But  there  are  three  points  in  the  last  writings  of 
St.  John  which  more  especially  stamp  his  teaching  with 
the  mark  of  finality. 

1.  The  first  of  these  is  the  new  and  marvellous  light 
which  he  throws  on  the  Idea  of  Eternity. 

The  use  of  the  word  aionios,  and  of  its  Hebrew 
equivalent,  olam,  throughout  the  whole  of  Scripture 
ought  to  have  been  sufficient  to  prove  to  every  thought- 
ful and  unbiassed  student  that  it  altogether  transcends 
the  thoroughly  vulgar  and  unmeaning  conception  of 
"endless."  Nothing,  perhaps,  tends  to  prove  more  clearly 
the  difficulty  of  eradicating  an  error  that  has  once  taken 
deep  and  agelong  root  in  the  minds  of  "  theologians  " 
than  the  fact  that  it  should  still  be  necessary  to  prove 
that  the  word  eternal,  far  from  being  a  mere  equivalent 
for  "  everlasting,"  never  means  "  everlasting  "  at  all, 
except  b}^  reflexion  from  the  substantives  to  which  it  is 
joined  ;  that  it  is  only  joined  to  those  substantives 
because  it  connotes  ideas  which  transcend  all  time  ;  that 
to  make  it  mean  nothing  but  time  endlessly  prolonged 
is  to  degrade  it  by  filling  it  with  a  merely  relative 
conception  which  it  is  meant  to  supersede,  and  by 
emptying  it  of  all  the  highest  conceptions  which  it  pro- 
perly includes.  I  am  well  aware  that  this  truth  will, 
for  some  time,  be  repeated  in  vain.  But,  once  more,  I 
repeat  that  if  by  aionios  St.  John  had  meant  "  endless" 
when  he  speaks  of  "  aeonian  life,"  there  was  the  per- 
fectly commonplace  and  unambiguous  word  akatahdos 
used  by  Apollos  in  Heb.  v.  6,  and  there  were  at  least 
five  or  six   other  adjectives  or  expressions  which  were 


ETERNAL   LIFE.  367 

ready  to  his  hand.     But  the  Life  which  had  been  mani- 
fested,   which  he    had  seen,  to    which  he  was  bearing 
witness,  which  stood  in  relation  to  the  Father,  and  was 
manifested  to  us,^  was  something  infinitely  higher  than 
a  mere  "endless"  life.    The  life — if  mere  living  be  life — 
of  the  most  doomed  and  apostate  of  the  human  race — 
the  life  even  of  the  devil  and  his  angels — is  an  "endless" 
living,  if  we  hold  that  man  and  evil  spirits  are  immortal. 
But    by   qualifying   the    divine     life    by   the    epithet 
"  eternal "  {aionio-s)  St.  John  meant,  not  an  endless  life 
(though  it  is  also  endless),  but  a  spiritual  life,  the  life 
which  is  in  God,  and  which  was  manifested  by  Christ 
to  us.     By  calling  it  aionios  he  meant  to  imply,  not — 
which  was  a  very  small  and  accidental  part  of  it — its 
unbroken   continuance,    but   its    ethical  quality.      The 
life  is  "  endless,"  not  because  it  is  the  infinite  extension 
of   time,  but  because  it  is  the  absolute   antithesis    of 
time ;  and  aionios  expresses  its  internal  quality,  not  as 
something  which  can  be  measured  by  infinite  tickings 
of  the  clocks,  but  as  something   incommensurable   by 
all  clocks,  were  they  to  tick  for  ever.     The  horologe  of 
earth,  as  Bengel  profoundly  expresses  it,  is  no  measure 
for  the  aeonologe  of  heaven.     The  meaning  of  "eternal" 
ought  long  ago  to  have  been  vindicated  from  its  popular 
degradation.       St.   John   is   the    last   of  all   Scripture 
writers  who  uses  it;  he  alone  of  all  Scripture  writers 
defines  it ;  and  he  makes  it  consist  not  in  idle  duration, 
but  in  progressive  knowledge.     In  defining  it,  he  says 
that  it  is  the  gift  of  Christ,  "  and  that  the  eternal  life 
is  this,  that  they  may  know  Thee  the  only  true  God, 
and  Him  whom  Thou  sendest,  even  Jesus  Christ."^ 

»  John  i.  2. 

2  Jolm  xvii.  2,  3.     Literally  "  that  they  may  bo  leaming  to  know  '' — 


368  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

For  thus  we  see  at  once,  that,  in  the  mind  of  St. 
John  eternal  life  is  an  antithesis  not  to  the  temporal, 
but  to  the  Seen  •}  that  it  is  not  a  life  which  shall  he, 
but  one  that,  for  the  believer,  now  is  ;  that  "  every  one 
who  beholdeth  the  Son  has — not  shall  have,  but  has — 
eternal  life;""  that  "he  who  hath  the  Son,  hath  the 
life  "  here  and  now ;  and  that  one  of  the  objects  why 
St.  John  wrote  at  all  was  that  they  might  know  that 
they  had  it.^  He  Avho  will  lay  aside  bigotry  and 
factiousness  and  newspaper  theology,  and  will  sincerely 
meditate  on  these  passages,  will  see  how  unfortunate 
is  the  antique  and  vulgar  error  as  to  the  meaning  of 
this  word.  If  a  man  be  incapable  of  seeing  this,  or 
unwilling  to  admit  it,  for  such  a  man  reasoning  is 
vain.* 

2.  Another  mark  of  finality  is  St.  John's  teaching 
about  the  Logos,  or  Word.  In  the  Epistle  he  enters 
into  no  details  or  description  respecting  the  nature  and 
Person  of  the  Logos  ;  and  yet — in  accordance  with  that 
peculiarity  of  his  method  which  we  have  already  noticed 
— the  doctrine  of  the  Logos,  as  the  source  of  all  life, 
is  the  fundamental  matter  and  pith  of  the  Epistle.'' 
This,  we  may  remark  in  passing,  is  one  of  the  indica- 
tions that  the  Epistle  was  a  didactic  accompaniment  of 

not  so   much  tho   possession   of  a  completed  life  as  of  a  life  which  is 
advancing  to  completion. 

1  John  iv.  14,  36 ;  \i.  27  ;  xii.  25. 

2  iii.  36  ;  T.  24 ;  y\.  40,  47,  54. 

3  1  John  V.  13.  14. 

*  I  should  not  use  language  so  positive  if  I  had  not  furnished  the  most 
decisive  and  overwhelming  proof  of  my  position  in  Mercy  and  Judgment, 
I)p.  391 — 405.  Of  that  proof  another  generation  will  be  able  to  judge. 
From  the  false  and  fleeting  criticisms  of  to-day  I  appeal  onco  more  to  a 
diviner  standard.  I  exclaim  again,  with  Pascal,  "  Ad  tuum,  Domine  Jem, 
tribunal  a'ppello." 

^  See  Haupt,  p.  4. 


DOCTRINE  OF  THE   LOGOS.  369 

the  Gospel.  But  in  the  use  of  the  Logos  as  a  distinct 
name  of  Christ  St.  John  stands  alone.  Other  Apostles 
— St.  Paul,  St.  James,  and,  above  all,  the  writer  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews — seem  to  hover  on  the  verge  of 
it ;  but  they  do  not  actually  use,  much  less  do  they  insist 
on  it;  and  when  they  approach  it  they  are  thinking 
always  of  the  Divinity  more  than  of  the  Humanity — ol 
the  glorified,  Eternal  Christ,  and  not  immediately  of  the 
man  Christ  Jesus.  Other  writers,  again,  both  Hebrew 
and  Hellenistic,  had  employed  terms  which  bore  some 
resemblance  to  it,  but  not  one  had  infused  into  it 
the  significance  which  makes  it  a  concentration  of  the 
Johannine  Gospel.  Philo  had  repeatedly  dwelt  on  the 
term,  and  surrounded  it  with  Divine  attributes ; 
but  Philo  knew  not  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  in  Philo  the 
Loo^os  is  surrounded  with  associations  derived  from  the 
Platonic  and  Stoic  philosophies.  The  Targums  had 
used  the  words  Mcymra  («to'o)  and  Bchilra  (tnm),  which 
could  indeed  only  mean  "the  Word"  ;  but  in  these  the 
use  had  been  intended  simply  to  avoid  the  rude  anthro- 
pomorphism of  early  Hebrew  literature,  and  to  make 
God  seem  more  distant  rather  than  more  near.  Alike 
the  Alexandrians  and  the  Targumists  would  have  read 
with  a  shock  of  astonishment  and  disapproval  that  utter- 
ance which  St.  John  puts  in  the  very  forefront  of  his 
Gospel,  as  containing  its  inmost  essence,  and  as  solving 
all  the  problems  of  the  world,  that  "  the  Logos  became 
ffesh.''  It  was  a  truth  far  beyond  anything  of  which 
they  had  dreamed,  that  the  Word — who  was  in  the 
beginning,  who  was  with  God,  who  was  God,  by  whom 
all  things  were  made,  in  whom  was  life,  which  life  was 
the  light  of  man — that  this  Word  was  in  the  world, 
came  to  His  own  people  and  His  own  home,  and  was 


370  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

by  most  of  them  rejected — that  this  Word  became 
FLESH,  and  tabernacled  among  us,  and  we  beheld  His 
glory,  a  glory  as  of  the  only-begotten  from  the  Father 
— full  of  grace  and  truth.  To  make  such  a  use  of  the 
word  Logos  was  to  slay  those  conceptions  which  lay  at 
the  heart  of  the  Alexandrian  theosophy  with  an  arrow 
winged  by  a  feather  from  its  own  breast.  It  was  to 
adopt  the  most  distinctive  watchword  of  the  Philonists 
in  order  to  overthrow  their  most  cherished  concep- 
tions. 

3.  I  see  yet  another  mark  of  Finality  in  what  St. 
John  says  of  God,  and  especially  in  the  First  Epistle. 
It  is  not  indeed  possible  to  make  the  whole  analysis 
of  the  Epistle  turn  on  the  three  great  utterances — 
definitions  we  dare  not  call  them,  yet  approximations  to 
some  description  of  the  Essence  of  Him  who  is  Divine 
— that  Grod  is  Eighteous,  that  God  is  Light,  and,  above 
all,  that  God  is  Love.  But  I  regard  it  as  a  most 
blessed  fact,  that  words  so  full  of  depth  and  blessedness 
should  occur  in  what  is  practically,  and  perhaps  literally, 
the  latest  utterance  of  Holy  Writ. 

"God  is  Eighteous,"  and  therefore  He  hates  all 
unrighteousness  in  others,  and  there  can  be  no  un- 
righteousness in  Him.  Unrighteousness,  masking  itself 
as  righteousness — unrighteousness  putting  on  as  its 
disguise  the  flaming  armour  of  religious  zeal — un- 
righteousness in  the  form  now  of  persecution,  now  of 
violence,  now  of  scholastic  orthodoxy,  now  of  deprecia- 
tion, unfairness,  and  slander — has  been  again  and  again 
represented  as  doing  Him  service.  But  because  He  is 
righteous  He  hates  it.  Whether  it  take  the  form  of 
Inquisitorial  cruelty  or  of  anonymous  falsehood,  all 
violence  is  hateful  to  Him.     Lying  for  God  is  to  God  an 


GOD   IS   LOVE.  371 

abomination,  even  when  the  lie  claims  to  be  a  shibboleth 
of  His  most  elect.  Want  of  candour,  want  of  gentle- 
ness, want  of  forbearance,  are  unhallowed  incense  which 
does  but  pollute  His  altar.  Notions  that  represent  Him 
as  a  God  of  arbitrary  caprice,  treating  men  as  though 
they  were  nothing  but  dead  clay,  to  be  dashed  about 
and  shattered  at  His  will — notions  which  represent  His 
justice  as  something  alien  from  ours,  and  those  things  as 
good  in  Him  which  would  be  evil  in  us — notions  which 
imagine  that  in  His  cause  we  may  do  evil  that  good 
may  come — those  idols  of  the  School  are  shattered  on 
the  rock  of  the  truth  that  God  is  Eighteous. 

"God  is  Light. "^  Notions  that  represent  Him  as 
taking  pleasure  in  man's  blind  and  narrow  dogmatism, 
self-satisfied  security,  and  bitter  exclusiveness  —  as 
making  His  chosen  and  His  favoured  ones  not  of 
earth's  best  and  noblest,  but  of  the  wrangling  reli- 
gionists who  claim  each  for  his  own.  party  the  monopoly 
of  His  revelation — as  though  one  could  love  the  dwarfed 
thistles  and  the  jagged  bents  better  than  the  cedars  of 
Lebanon — these  idols  of  the  fanatic,  idols  of  the  sec- 
tarian, idols  of  the  Pharisee,  are  shattered  by  the 
rino-ing-  hammerstroke  of  the  truth  that  God  is 
Light. 

God  is  Love.  The  words  do  not  occur  in  the  Gospel, 
and  yet  they  are  the  epitome  of  the  Gospel,  and  the 
epitome  of  the  whole  Scriptures,  and  the  epitome  of  the 
history  of  mankind  ;  and  as  such  the}^  are  a  standing 
protest  against  all  that  is  worst  and  darkest  in  many  of 

^  Rabbi  Simon  Ben  Jehosadek  asked  R.  Samuel  Ben  Nachman  "  from 
what  the  liglit  was  created  ?  "  He  answered,  in  a  wliisper  of  awe,  "  God 
wrapped  Himself  in  light  as  in  a  garment,  and  caused  its  briglit  glory  to 
shine  from  one  end  of  tlie  world  to  the  other  "  (Bereshitli  Rabba,  eh.  iii.l 

y  2 


372  THE    EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

the  world's  schemes  of  inferential  theology.  God  is 
Love — not  merely  loving,  but  Love  itself.  The  notions, 
therefore,  which  would  represent  Him  as  living  a  life 
turned  towards  self,  or  folded  within  self,  caring  only 
for  His  own  glory,  caring  nothing  for  the  endless 
agonies  of  the  creatures  He  has  made,  f)redestining  them 
by  millions  to  unutterable  torments  by  horrible  decrees, 
regarding  even  the  sins  of  children  as  infinite,  "  draw- 
ing the  sword  on  Calvary  to  smite  down  His  only 
Son  " — these  idols  of  the  Zealot,  idols  of  the  Calvinist, 
idols  of  those  who  think  that  they  by  their  wrath  can 
work  the  righteousness  of  God,  and  that  they  "  can  deal 
damnation  round  the  land  on  each  they  deem  their 
foe," — these  idols  of  the  Inquisitor,  idols  of  the  perse- 
cutor, idols  of  the  intolerant  ignorance  of  human  infalli- 
bility, idols  of  the  sectarian  newspaper  and  the  religious 
partisan,  are  dashed  to  pieces  by  the  sweeping  and 
illimitable  force  of  the  truth  that  God  is  Love. 

And,  therefore,  those  three  final  utterances  of  Eeve- 
lation  will  become  more  and  more,  we  trust,  the  protec- 
tion, the  emancipation,  the  precious  heritage  of  all 
mankind ;  they  will  be  the  barrier  against  wicked  per- 
secutions, against  unjust  calumnies,  against  savage 
attacks  of  sectarian  hatred.  They  are  as  a  charter  of 
Humanity  against  the  misrepresentations  of  religion  by 
misguided  Infidelity — against  its  no  less  perilous  jDcrver- 
sion  by  the  encroachments  and  usurpations  of  religious 
hatred  and  religious  pride. 

4.  We  may  see  a  last  mark  of  finality  in  the  simplifi- 
cation of  the  ultimate  essential  elements  of  Christian 
truth  which  v/e  find  in  St.  John.  In  reading  St.  Paul 
we  are  at  once  struck  with  the  richness  and  variety  of 
the  terms  and  phrases  which  he  has  introduced  into  the 


ST.   JOHN  AND   ST.  PAUL.  373 

statement  of  Christian  dogma.  St.  John,  on  the  other 
hand,  moves  in  the  sphere  of  a  few  ultimate  verities. 
St.  Paul  is  like  a  painter  who  works  out  his  results  by 
the  use  of  many  colours,  and  with  an  infinitude  of 
touches ;  St.  John  produces  the  effect  which  he  desires 
by  a  few  pure  colours  and  a  few  sweeping,  but  consum- 
mate strokes.  St.  Paul  is  discursive,  St.  John  intuitive. 
St.  Paul  begins  with  man,  St.  John  with  Grod.  In  other 
words,  St.  Paul  passes  from  anthropology  to  theolog3^ 
and  St.  John  moves  chiefly  in  the  purely  theologic 
sphere.  St.  Paul  reasons  most  respecting  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  and  how  it  becomes  the  justification  of 
man ;  St.  John's  aim  is  to  show  the  nature  of  Eternal 
Life,  and  how  man  participates  therein.  Hence  the 
different  tone  of  their  moral  teaching.  The  aim  of  St. 
Paul  is  human  and  practical,  and  he  dwells  incessantly 
on  Faith,  Hope,  and  Charity.  St.  John's  Divine  idealism 
is  mainly  occupied  with  the  abstract  conceptions  of  Love, 
and  Life,  and  Light.  St.  Paul  is  pleading  with  men  as 
they  are,  and  building  them  up  into  what  they  should  be. 
St.  John  assumes  that  the  Christians  to  whom  he  ^vrites 
are  resting  with  him  in  the  full  knowledge  of  Christ. 
The  Churches  of  St.  Paul  are  full  of  disturbing  elements  ; 
the  Church  which  St.  John  mentally  addresses  is  the 
true  and  inner  Church,  which  has  no  new  doctrine  to 
learn,  which  has  received  the  unction  from  the  Holy 
One,  and  which  is  separated  by  an  unimaginable  abyss 
from  the  world  and  from  its  own  false  members.^  St. 
Paul  is  ever  yearning  for  an  ultimate  fraternity  of  all 
men,  a  universal  and  absolute  triumph  of  the  work  of 
redemption ;  St.  John  fixes  his  e^^es  on  the  Perfect 
Church  and   the    Perfect    Christian,    with    whom   the 

1  1  John  ii.  20  ;  iii.  14  ;  v.  15. 


374  THE    EARLY   DATS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

virulence  of  evil  and  the  ultimate  destiny  of  evil  seem 
to  have  no  immediate  concern/ 

5.  Now  we  cannot  suppose  that  these  blessed  and 
mighty  thoughts  occurred  for  the  first  time  on  St.  John's 
written  page.  They  must  have  been  previously  expressed 
in  his  oral  teaching.  And  would  it  have  been  strange 
if — after  having  heard  so  much  about  the  Life  of 
Christ,  so  much  about  His  nature  and  person,  so 
many  of  His  discourses,  so  many  applications  of  the 
truth  of  His  Gospel  to  meet  every  phase  of  moral 
temptation  and  philosophic  difficulty — the  Bishops  and 
Elders  came  to  St.  John  to  urge  him,  before  he  died, 
to  set  forth  his  testimony  to  the  world  in  writing  ?  At 
first  he  shrank  from  so  solemn  a  task  out  of  humility.^ 
But  on  their  still  pressing  him,  "  Fast  with  me  for 
three  days,"  he  answered — so  runs  the  deeply-interesting 
tradition  preserved  for  us  in  the  Muratorian  fragment 
— "  and  let  us  tell  one  another^  any  revelation  which 
may  be  made  to  us  severally  (for  or  against  the  plan). 
On  the  same  night  it  was  revealed  to  the  Apostle 
Andrew  that  John  should  relate  all  in  his  own  name, 
and  that  all  should  review  his  writing."  "  And  then," 
says  St.  Jerome,  in  his  allusion  to  this  tradition,  "  after 
the  fast  was  ended,  steeped  with  inspired  truth  {revela- 
tione  saturatus)y  he  indited  the  heaven-sent  preface,  'In 
the  beginning  -was  the  Wordy  "* 

^  See  the  able  essay,   "Paul  et  Jean,"  iu  Reuss,   Theol.  Chret.  ii. 

572—600. 

*  Epipliau.  Saer.  li.  12,  5ib  vcrrepov  avayKoi^ei  rh  ayiou  nvev/jLa  irapaiTovfjifvov 

.  .  Si'  fu\dfleiav  Koi  Tairiivo(ppo(Xvvr]v.  Comp.  Euseb.  iii.  24  {(iravayKes), 
and  Jer.  Prol.  in  Matt.  ("  Coactus  ab  omnibus  imcno  tunc  Asiae 
episcopis,"  ifcc). 

3  This  soems  to  bo  tlio  moaning  of  altendrum,  as  in  the  Vulg.  of 
James  v.  16  (Westcott,  Hist,  of  Canon,  p.  527 ;  St.  John,  p.  xxxv.). 

^  Jor.  Comm.  in  Matt.  Prol.     Comp.  Clem.  Alex.  a/>.  Euseb.  H.  E. 


THE    GOSPEL   AND   THE    EPISTLE.  375 

Such,  then,  having  been  the  origin  of  the  GTospel,  it 
suppUes  us  with  a  certain  clue  to  the  origin  of  the  Epistle. 
A  mere  glance  at  the  two  writings  shows  that,  on  the 
one  hand,  there  is  the  closest  possible  connexion  between 
them,  and  that,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Gospel  was  the 
earlier  of  the  two.^     For  the  Gospel  contains  the  more 
explicit,  the  Epistle  the  more  allusive  and  concentrated 
expressions.     The  Gospel  is  intelligible  by  itself  ;  the 
Epistle  would  hardly  be   intelligible  without  some  pre- 
vious  instruction    to    explain    its    phraseology.       The 
Gospel  shows  us  how  various  expressions  originated  ;  the 
Epistle   adopts,    generalises,    and   applies  them.      The 
Gospel  furnishes  us  with  a  history,  inspired  throughout 
by  certain  immanent  ideas ;  the  Epistle  assumes  those 
ideas  to  be  known,  and  points  out  their  practical  bearing. 
The  Gospel  deals  with  the  manifestation  of  the  Word  in 
the  flesh  as  an  event  which  the  Evangelist  has  actually 
witnessed  in  all  its  phases  ;  the  Epistle  shows  how  that 

v'l.  14.  But  see  Basnage,  viii.  2,  §  6.  This  was  afterwards  improved  into 
the  story  that  he  wrote  the  whole  Gospel  impromptu  (ouToo-xeSiatrTl),  and 
that  his  autograph,  in  letters  of  gold,  was  preserved  in  the  Clmrch  of 
Ephesus  (see  Lampe,  Proleg.  p.  171). 

^  The  reader  will  find  tlie  proof  of  this  placed  visibly  before  him  if  he 
will  study  the  parallels  between  the  Gospel  and  the  First  Epistle  of 
St.  John,  as  gathered  (among  others)  by  Canon  Westcott,  in  his  edition 
of  the  Gospel.  There  are  no  less  than  thirty-five  such  passages,  and 
it  may  be  seen  at  a  glance  that  they  are  neither  borrowed  nor  imitated, 
but  independently  introduced  in  the  way  which  would  be  most  natural 
in  two  works  wi-itten  by  the  same  author.  More  than  half  of  the 
parallels  are  drawn  from  the  last  discourses  (John  xii. — xvii.).  To  me 
it  seems  clear  that  the  Epistle  represents  the  later,  less  developed,  and 
more  allusive  form  of  expression.  Reuss  says  that  the  Gospel  is  needed 
as  a  commentary  on  the  Epistle ;  but  it  is  at  least  equally  true  to  say 
that  the  Epistle  is  needed  as  an  application  of  the  Gospel.  It  is  clear 
that  both  gain  indefinitely  when  they  are  read  together.  St.  Clemens 
implies  that  tlie  Epistle  was  written  after  the  Gospel,  for  he  says  that 
"the  Epistle  begins  with  a  spiritual  i^roeui,  following  that  of  the  Gospel, 
and  in  unison  with  it  "  {Admnbratt.  p.  1009). 


376  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

event  bears  on  the  errors  which  were  beginning  to  creep 
into  the  Church,  and  on  the  Uves  of  its  individual 
members. 

We  may,  therefore,  safely  conclude  that  the  Epistle 
had  distinct  reference  to  the  Gospel ;  but  we  may  also 
infer  that  they  were  published  together,  or  in  very  close 
succession.  The  Epistle  implies  that  the  truths  of  the 
Gospel  are  known  to  the  reader  with  all  the  freshness  of 
recent  study.  It  is  based  upon  them  as  though  they 
would  be  already  prominent  in  the  reader's  mind. 
This  is  explicable  if  we  suppose  that  the  one  treatise 
accompanied  the  other,  and  it  would  also  account  for 
the  absence  of  salutation  and  benediction,  which  would 
only  partially  be  accounted  for  by  the  encyclical  character 
of  the  Epistle.  The  Epistle  is  most  easily  understood 
if  we  suppose  it  to  be  addressed  not  only  to  the  Churches 
of  Asia,  whom  the  Apostle  may  have  had  primarily  in 
view,  but  to  all  readers  of  the  Gospel.  The  external  proof 
of  this  is  indeed  insignificant ;  but  it  is  sufficiently 
established  by  internal  probability.  If  we  may  accept 
with  reasonable  confidence  the  tradition  that  the  Gospel, 
as  well  as  the  Apocalypse,  was  written  in  Patmos  and 
published  in  Ephesus,  the  same  tradition  will  apply 
to  the  Epistle  also.^  And  this  would  be  a  further  light 
on  the  absence  of  salutations.  Patmos  is  a  small  and 
rocky  island,  with  few  inhabitants.  It  is  doubtful 
whether  it  had  any  Christian  community  within  its 
narrow  limits ;  but  even  if  it  had,  such  a  community 
would  be  all  but  wholly  unknown,  and  could  hardly  be 
regarded  as  an  organised  Church. 

1  Patmos  was  witliin  a  day's  roach  of  Epliesus,  aud  if  St.  Joliu  had 
already  folt  that  the  loneliness  of  the  island  was  suitable  to  meditation, 
he  miglit  have  been  led  to  retire  tliither  once  more  while  he  was  medi- 
tating on  his  last  aud  greatest  work. 


WHERE  WRITTEN.  377 

6.  The  only  supposed  clue  as  to  the  readers  to  whom 
the  Epistle  was  addressed  is  the  curious  statement  of  St. 
Augustine,  in  one  single  passage,  that  it  was  written 
"  to  the  Parthians."  It  is  clear  that  this  is  either  a 
misreading,  or  a  blunder.  If,  however,  it  be  a  mis- 
reading, all  the  conjectural  emendations  of  it  have  been 
quite  unsuccessful.  Hug's  supposition,  that  it  crept 
in  by  mistake  from  the  superscription  of  the  Second 
Epistle,  "  pros  parihenom,"  "  to  Virgins,"  will  be  con- 
sidered farther  on.^ 

7.  The  supposition  that  the  Apostle  wrote  in  Patmos 
well  accords  with  the  whole  tone  of  the  Epistle.  It 
was  written  evidently  at  a  time  when  the  Church  was 
not  under  the  stress  of  special  persecutions.^  Dangers 
and  sufferings  are  not  alluded  to ;  there  are  no  trum- 
pet-calls to  courage  or  endurance.  This  period  of 
peace  may  have  been  due  to  the  crushing  destruc- 
tion which  had  now  fallen  on  the  Jewish  nation- 
ality ;  for,  as  we  are  again  and  again  informed,  both 
in  history  and  in  Scripture,  the  deadly  animosities  of 
the  Grentiles  were  in  the  early  days  stirred  up  for  the 
most  part  by  Jewish  hatred.^    Now  in  the  Epistle  there 

'  Seo  infra,  on  the  Second  Epistle. 

2  This  would  point  to  some  date  after  the  reign  of  Nero  (a.d.  54—68). 
We  see  further  that  it  must  have  been  wi'itteu,  as  the  Gospel  was,  after 
the  destruction  of  Jenxsalem  (a.d.  70),  and  either  before  the  persecution 
of  the  Christians  in  A.D.  95,  during  the  reign  of  Domitian  (A.D.  91 — 96), 
or  between  that  date  and  the  persecution  of  the  Christians  in  the  reign  of 
Trajan  (a.d.  98).  Ewald  {Bie  Johan.  Schriften,  i.  471)  suggests  a.d.  90 
as  a  probable  date.  Canon  Westcott  says  that  tlio  Gospel  may  be 
referred  to  the  last  decennium  of  the  first  century,  and  even  to  tlio  close 
of  it  {St.  John,  p.  xl.).  This  view  is  supported  both  by  early  tradition 
and  by  the  facts  that  (1)  the  Gospel  assumes  a  knowledge  of  the  substance 
of  the  Synoptic  narratives;  (2)  it  deals  witli  later  aspects  of  Chi-istiau 
life  and  opinion  than  these ;  (3)  it  corresponds  with  the  circumstances  of 
a  new  world  [id.,  pp.  xxxv. — xl.), 

3  Acts  xvii. ;  1  Thess.  i.  14 — 16;  ii.  15;  Fhil.  iii.  2,  &c.  Seo  too  the 
remarks  of  Justin  in  his  Dial.  c.  Tryph. 


378  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

is  no  distinct  reference  either  to  Jews  or  Gentiles.  All 
the  old  questions  between  the  Church  and  these  two 
great  masses  of  mankind  have  sunk  out  of  sight.  The 
controversies  as  to  the  relations  which  should  subsist 
between  Jewish  and  Gentile  converts  within  the  limits 
of  the  Church  itself  are  regarded  as  settled.  In  the 
eyes  of  St.  John  there  are  but  two  great  existing  com- 
munities, and  those  are  not  Jews  and  Gentiles,  but  the 
Church  and  the  world.  The  severance  between  them 
is  complete  and  absolute.  In  this  respect,  as  in  so 
many  others,  the  Epistle  recalls  the  last  discourses 
of  our  Lord.  In  them,  too,  the  hatred  of  the  world 
means  that  of  the  Jew  no  less  than  that  of  the  Gentile. 
But  this  hatred  is  here  calmly  assumed  without  being 
dwelt  upon.  There  is  no  complaint  respecting  it.  Not 
a  word  is  said  as  to  its  origin  ;  not  a  hint  is  breathed  as 
to  its  issues.  The  world  is  not  even  spoken  of  as  a 
source  of  special  temptation,  or  as  a  sphere  for  mis- 
sionary activity.  It  is  simplj;^  set  on  one  side  as  a 
Satanic  kingdom,  a  kingdom  of  darkness  and  of  death, 
mth  which  it  is  impossible  to  conceive  that  the  Christian 
should  have  anything  to  do.  But  such  a  view  is  little 
possible  to  one  who  lives  in  the  heart  of  great  cities, 
and  is  in  daily  struggle  with  hostile  forces  from  without. 
It  would  be  far  more  possible  to  the  contemplative 
recluse  in  some  secluded  retirement  than  to  the  toiling^ 
Apostle  in  the  streets  of  Sardis  or  Ephesus. 

8.  Yet  there  are  dangers  which  St.  John  evidently 
contemplates.  They  are  dangers  from  heresy  and  from 
antichrists ;  dangers  not  arising  from  attacks  of  the 
world  outside  the  Church,  but  from  developments 
of  the  world  within  it.  The  perils  which  the  Chris- 
tians have  to  encounter  are  perils  from  those  who  them- 


DANGERS   FROM   WITHIN.  379 

selves  profess  the  faith ;  from  wolves — clad  in  sheep's 
clothing  ;  from  Satan — disguised  as  an  angel  of  light. 
What  St.  John  dreads  is  not  flagrant  wickedness  and 
open  blasphemy,  but  "  false  types  of  goodness,"  and 
"false  types  of  orthodoxy."  Such  perils  had  existed 
from  the  very  earliest  days  in  which  the  Church  was  a 
Church  at  all ;  but  now,  in  the  pause  from  outward 
assault,  they  were  assuming  subtler  and  more  seductive 
forms.  In  one  shape  or  other,  in  their  moral  or  their 
intellectual  aspects,  every  Apostle  has  lifted  up  against 
them  his  warning  voice.  St.  Paul  had  been  obliged, 
even  weeping,  to  warn  his  converts  against  false 
teachers ;  St.  Peter,  St.  Jude,  St.  James  had  "  burst  into 
plain  thunderings  and  lightnings  "  against  them.  Far 
different  is  the  tone  of  St.  John.  That  they  are  greatly 
in  his  thoughts  is  evident.  Nay,  since  he  frequently 
refers  to  their  several  tenets,  since  in  two  passages  he 
expressly  names  them,^  since  the  very  last  words  of  his 
Epistle  refer  to  them,^  it  is  clear  that  it  was  one  of  his 
primary  objects  to  protect  the  Church  from  their  in- 
sidious teachings.  Yet  how  instructive  is  the  tone  in 
which  he  speaks  about  them  !  It  is  calm,  not  tumultuous 
or  agitated.  It  leads  to  the  establishment  of  positive 
truths,  not  to  anathemas  against  negative  errors.  It 
does  not  betray  the  least  touch  of  anxiety.  What  St. 
John  has  to  teach  is  the  nature  of  eternal  life  ;  its 
concentration  in  the  Word;  its  communication  to  the 
world.  The  passages  about  the  antichrists  might  even 
be  omitted  without  materially  affecting  the  structure  of 
the  Epistle.  Here  again  we  find  not  only  the  stamp  of 
finality,  on  which  we  have  already  dwelt,  but  an 
indication  of  the  circumstances  under   which  St.  John 

1  John  ii.  20—26 ;  iv.  1—6.  -  1  John  v.  21. 


380  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

was  writing.  He  is  not  in  the  thick  of  the  battle.  His 
soul  is  not  harrowed  by  daily  watching  the  ravages  of 
error.  liemoved  from  the  scene  of  conflict,  living 
in  daily  meditation  on  the  truth,  in  dail}''  communion 
with  Grod,  he  can  write  in  the  tone  of  serene  joy,  of 
sovereign  conviction.  It  is  the  peculiarity  which  we 
have  already  noticed  in  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Philip- 
pians.  The  keynote  of  that  letter  is  joy.  In  the 
prison,  amid  general  desertion,  left  face  to  face  with 
God,  St.  Paul  seems  as  if  the  one  thought  which 
inspires  his  whole  being  is  "  Rejoice  in  the  Lord 
always  :  again  I  will  say  Rejoice."  It  is  the  same  with 
St.  John.  He  speaks  with  the  composure  Avhich  befits 
the  last  of  the  Apostles,  the  composure  of  a  man  who 
knew  the  certainty,  who  had  witnessed  the  victories  of 
the  fiiith.  "The  unique  consciousness  which  an  Apostle, 
as  he  grew  older,  could  carry  within  himself,  and  which 
he,  once  the  favourite  disciple,  had  in  a  peculiar  mea- 
sure ;  the  calm  superiority,  clearness,  and  decision  in 
thinking  on  Christian  subjects ;  the  rich  experience  of 
a  long  life  steeled  in  the  victorious  struggle  with  every 
unchristian  element;  and  a  glowing  language  lying 
concealed  under  their  calmness,  which  makes  us  feel 
intuitively  that  it  does  not  in  vain  commend  us  to 
love,  as  the  highest  attainment  of  Christianity — 
all  this  coincides  so  remarkably  in  this  Epistle,  that," 
— in  spite  of  its  purely  impersonal  character  and  the 
lofty  delicacy  with  which,  as  in  the  Gospel,  the  wi'iter 
retires  into  the  background,  unwilling  to  speak  of  him- 
self— "  every  reader  of  that  period,  probably  without 
any  further  intimation,  might  readily  determine  who  he 
was."  ^      In  its    "  unruffled     and    heavenly   repose,    it 

'  Ewald,  Die  Johan.  Schriften,  i.  431. 


LOFTT   SPIRITUALITY.  381 

appears  to  be  the  tone  not  so  much  of  a  father  talkin<]^ 
with  his  beloved  children,  as  of  a  glorified  saint  speaking 
to  mankind  from  a  higher  world.  Never  in  any  writing 
has  the  doctrine  of  heavenly  love,  of  a  love  working  in 
stillness,  a  love  ever  unwearied,  never  exhausted,  so 
thoroughly  proved,  and  approved  itself,  as  in  this 
Epistle."^ 

1  Id.  ib. 


CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

CHARACTERISTICS    OF    THE    MIND    AND    STYLE    OF    ST.    JOHN. 

"  Columba  sancta  Ecclesia  est ;  quae  duas  alas  habet  per  dilectionem 
Dei  et  proximi." — A.  de  St.  Victors. 

The  effect  which  the  Epistle  thus  produces  upon  us 
is  due  partly  to  the  habit  of  St.  John's  mind,  partly  to 
the  peculiarities  of  his  style. 

1.  One  great  peculiarity  of  his  mind — on  which  we 
have  already  incidentally  touched — is  his  contemplative- 
ness ; — what  has  been  sometimes,  but  not  very  accu- 
rately, called  his  mysticism.  It  was  the  invariable 
tendency  of  his  mind  in  these  his  later  years  to  live 
and  move  in  the  region  of  abstract  thought.  The 
abstractions  are,  however,  by  no  means  treated  as  ab- 
stractions, but  rather  as  facts  and  experiences  of  life. 
In  St,  John  we  see  yet  another  illustration  of  the 
fundamental  distinction  between  the  Nominalist  and 
the  Realist; — the  Nominalist  who  regards  abstract  terms 
as  representing  nothing  but  the  generalisations  of  the 
mind  out  of  concrete  presentments,  the  Realist  who 
regards  them  as  representing  those  eternal  ideas  which 
are  the  only  absolute  realities.  St.  John  is  entirely  a 
Realist.  It  has  been  truly  said  of  him  that  "Universalia 
ante  rein"  is  the  principle  of  all  his  philosophy.  With 
him  Ideas — Light,  Darkness — Truth,  Falsehood — are 
not  mere  concepts,  but  are  the  actual  reality,  the  prin- 
ciples of  life  out  of  which  all  individual  things  emerge. 


IDEALISM  OF  ST.   JOHN.  383 

In  liis  point  of  view  Mankind,  the  individual  man,  the 
particular  action,  only  exist  as  the  Idea  prescribes.  The 
Idea,  indwelling  in  them,  moulds  them  as  a  law,  by 
virtue  of  which  all  that  belongs  to  them  is  fashioned. 
Thus,  to  St.  John,  history  is  the  invisible  translated 
into  the  visible.^  In  the  Gospel  it  is  shown  how  the 
ideas  have  been  introduced  into  this  earthly  life ;  in  the 
Epistle  how  the  life  of  the  individual  may  be  modified 
in  accordance  with  them.^  Thus  once  more  we  see  how 
every  thought  which  St.  John  utters  depends  upon  his 
doctrine  of  "  the  Word  made  flesh."  The  Divine  ideas 
of  which  he  speaks — Truth,  Life,  Light — are  realities, 
and  the  only  realities,  because  they  are  inherent  in  the 
Logos.  They  are  in  men  only  because  He  is  in  men, 
and  they  are  the  only  Life,  the  only  Light,  the  only 
Truth.  The  Gospel  shows  how,  by  the  manifestation 
of  the  Logos  on  earth,  the  fulness  which  was  in  Him 
is  imparted  to  us ;  the  Epistle  speaks  throughout  of 
our  personal  appropriation  of  this  fulness  and  the  way 
in  which  it  is  expressed  in  Christian  lives. 

2.  But  all  this  at  once  accounts  for  another  of  his 
characteristics — namely,  the  sovereign  calm  of  the 
Apostle's  tone.  In  this  region  of  the  Idea  there  is  no 
room  for  jarring  conflicts.  He  is  building  the  super- 
structure, not  laying  the  foundation.  He  is  reminding, 
not  instructing.  He  is  perfecting,  not  commencing. 
He  is  stating,  not  arguing.  He  is  delivering  a  solemn 
homily,  not  conducting  an  embittered  controversy. 
He  can  appeal  to  his  readers,  as  those  who  know  ;^  as 

1  Haupt,  pp.  376,  377. 

2  "  Tlie  Gospel  seeks  to  deepen  faith  in  Christ,  the  Epistle  sets  fortli 
the  rigliteousness  which  is  necessary  to  faith,  and  only  possible  to  faith  " 
(Hoffmann). 

3  ]  John  ii.  12—14. 


384  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

those  whose  sins  have  been  forgiven ;  avIio  have  an 
unction  from  the  Holy  One  ;^  who  ah-eady  believe  ;" 
to  whom  the  new  commandment  can  be  represented  as 
the  old.  And  this  is  the  reason  why  his  defensive 
polemics  can  take  the  form  of  positive  instruction. 
He  can  teach  true  Christians  to  conquer  heresy  by 
the  expulsive  power  of  right  affections.  He  can 
invigorate  their  interior  life  as  the  best  means  of 
strengthening  their  outward  warfare.  The  multiplica- 
tion of  antichrists  was  a  serious  danger,  but  the 
Churches  would  be  less  likely  to  succumb  to  it  if  he 
could  inspire  them  with  the  victorious  tranquillity  with 
which  he  himself  regarded  all  dangers,  as  he  looked 
forth  on  the  troubled  sea  from  the  haven  of  his  island 
rest. 

3.  A  third  secret  of  St.  John's  power  lies  in  his  style. 
It  is  a  style  absolutely  unique,  supremely  original, 
and  full  of  charm  and  sweetness.  Under  the  semblance 
of  extreme  simplicity,  it  hides  unfathomable  depths.  It 
is  to  a  great  extent  intelligible  to  the  youngest  child,  to 
the  humblest  Christian  ;  yet  to  enter  into  its  full  meaning 
exceeds  the  power  of  the  deepest  theologian.  Thus,  St. 
John  remarkably  exemplifies  the  definition  that  genius 
is  "  the  heart  of  childhood  taken  up  and  glorified  in 
the  powers  of  manhood."  In  his  Gospel  and  Ej)istles 
the  artless  ingenuousness  of  a  child  is  intimately  blended 
with  the  deep  thoughtfulness  of  a  man.  But  the  style, 
by  its  very  characteristics,  would  be  ill  suited  to  con- 
troversy. It  is  not  syllogistic,  like  that  of  St.  Paul;  nor 
rhetorical,  like  that  of  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews.  It  is  rather  contemplative,  "  noting  the  sub- 
stance of  the  thoughts  without  marking  the  mutual 
1  1  John  ii.  20,  27.  -  1  Johu  v.  13. 


STYLE    OF    ST.   JOHN.  385 

relations  of  the  thoughts  themselves."^  The  logic  moves, 
as  has  been  said,  in  circles  rather  than  straight  onwards.^ 
The  sentences  are  ordinated  by  simple  conjunctions,  not 
subordinated  to  each  other  by  final  particles.  The 
periods  sire  paraf actio,  noi  syntactic.  The  particles,  as  in 
Aramaic,  are  few.^  Hence,  though  the  G-reek  is  pure,  in 
so  far  that  it  is  free  from  solecisms,  it  is  as  unlike  Greek 
as  possible  in  its  periodic  structure.  There  is  scarcely 
a  single  oblique  sentence  throughout  St.  John's  Gospel. 
Often  the  sentences  follow  each  other  without  any  con- 
junction between  them,  and  only  by  taking  up  again 
the  chief  word  in  the  previous  clause.  But  under  the 
appearance  of  incessant  repetitions  the  thought  is  still 
constantly  advanced.  "  The  still  waters,"  as  Herder  says, 
"  run  deep,  flowing  along  with  the  easiest  words,  but 
the  profoundest  meaning."  The  thoughts  are  pressed 
home  in  the  simplest  fashion  of  Aramaic  idiom  by  being 
expressed  first  positively,  then  negatively.^     They  gain 

'  Braune  calls  it  "  tlio  dialectics  of  contemplation." 

2  Diisterdieck.  Tholuck  had  already  given  to  St.  John's  style  the 
epithet  "  cycloidal."  Reuan  admits  that  the  style  has  "  fervour,  and 
occasionally  a  kind  of  sublimity,  but  withal  something  inflated,  unreal, 
obscure — an  utter  want  of  naivete." 

^  Ebrard,  Introd.  He  points  out  that  the  sentences  are  often 
joined  by  Ka\,  when  St.  Paul  would  have  used  Se  or  yap.  St.  John  con- 
stantly makes  use  of  anaphora,  i.e.,  the  introduction  of  a  new  sentence 
by  the  repetition  of  a  word  which  has  just  been  used.  Erasmus 
excellently  describes  it:  "Dicendi  genus  ita  velut  ansulis  ex  sese 
cohsereutibiis  coutextus,  nonuunquam  ex  contrariis,  nonnunquam  ex 
similibus,  nonnunquam  ex  iisdem  subinde  repetitis  .  .  .  ut  orationis 
quodque  membrum  semper  excipiat  prius,  sic  ut  prioris  finis  iuitium  sit 
sequentis." 

*  St.  John  seems  to  "  think  in  antitheses."  It  is  his  manner  "  to 
construct  the  matter  of  a  positive  idea  out  of  its  combination  or  contrast 
with  its  opposite."  By  a  curious  variation  of  stylo,  for  which  it  is  not 
easy  to  account,  we  have  conditional  sentences  ("  if  we  walk,"  "  if  we 
say,"  "  if  we  confess  ")  in  the  first  section  of  the  Epistle  (i.  6  ;  ii.  8),  and 
participial  construction  ("he  that  loveth,"  "he  that  saith")  afterwards. 

Z 


386  THE   EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

further  from  the  numerical  symmetry  of  the  clauses 
into  which  they  are  thrown.^  The  same  word  occurs 
again  and  again  as  the  leading  word  of  an  entire  section 
until  it  becomes  impressive  by  the  very  monotony  of  its 
iteration.  It  is  like  a  stone  flung  into  a  smooth  lake, 
round  which  the  ripples  widen  to  the  shore  in  concentric 
circles.  No  style  could  be  Avorse  to  imitate.  In  feeble 
hands  it  would  deserve  the  charges  of  weakness,  tauto- 
logy, senility,  which  have  been  so  idly  made  against 
it.  On  the  other  hand,  no  style  could  better  suit  the 
character  of  a  mind  absorbed  in  heavenly  contemplation ; 
— of  a  mind  filled  with  conceptions  of  a  depth  so  inex- 
haustible that  words,  however  often  repeated,  failed  to 
convey  the  fullness  of  meaning  with  which  they  were 
charged. 

4.  But — to  revert  to  the  characteristics  of  St.  John's 
later  teachings — it  must  not  be  supposed  that  St.  John 
has  no  sternness  in  him.  Had  such  been  the  case  he 
could  not  have  been  the  Son  of  Thunder.  Probably  the 
natural  character  of  no  man  had  ever  been  so  softened 
and  ennobled  as  his  had  been  by  the  long  years  of 
Christian  suffering  and  Christian  education ;  yet  the 
elements  of  the  natural  character  remained.  The  essence 
of    St.    John's    temperament,    the    foundation    of    his 


^  There  is  au  interesting  specimen  of  tliis  numerical  eoncinuity  of 
expression  in  ii.  9 — 11,  where,  in  steady  progression,  tlie  first  A'erse  has 
one  predicate  :  "  He  who  saith  that  he  is  in  the  light,  and  hateth  his 
brother"  (a)  "is  in  the  darkness  even  still."  The  second  verse  has  two 
predicates  :  "  He  who  lovoth  his  brother  "  (a)  "  abidetli  in  the  light," 
(0)  "  and  there  is  no  stumblingblock  in  him."  The  tliird  verse  has  three 
predicates:  "But  he  who  hateth  his  brother"  (o)  "is  in  the  darkness," 
[H)  "  and  Avalketh  in  the  darkness,"  (7)  "  and  knowoth  not  whither  he 
goeth,  because  the  darkness  blinded  his  eyes."  The  symmetry  is  so 
absolute  in  its  musical  tlow  and  rhythmic  balance  that  even  the  double 
clause  of  the  last  lino  con-osponds  to  the  double  clause  of  thafii-st. 


TONE    OF    SEVERITY.  387 

teaching,  in  these  his  later  years,  was  love ;  but  where 
there  is  an  intense  and  perfect  love  there  must  also 
be  hatred  of  all  that  most  offends  and  injures  love ; 
not  hatred  of  men — that  becomes  impossible — but 
hatred  of  all  that  degrades  men  into  beasts  or  devils. 
It  is  impossible  not  to  feel  that  there  is  an  accent  of 
intense  severity — of  a  severity  even  more  intense  than 
that  of  St.  James — in  such  words  as, 

'^'He  that  doeth  sin  is  from  the  Devil,  because  the  Devil 
sinneth  from  the  hegi7ining!'  "  Every  one  loho  ahideth  in 
Him  sinneth  iwt ;  every  one  ivJto  sinneth  hath  not  seen 
Him,  nor  even  knoion  Him."  "  Everyone  who  doeth  not 
riyhteousness  is  not  from  God,  nor  he  who  loveth  not  his 
brother."  ^ 

How  does  such  language  accord  with  Christ's  un- 
bounded love  to  sinners,  to  publicans,  to  harlots,  even 
to  Pharisees  ?  How  is  it  reconcilable  with  the  paternal 
tenderness,  the  overflowing  love,  the  gentle  tolerance, 
which  breathes  through  the  rest  of  the  Epistle  ?  How 
is  it  in  unison  with  certain  and  universal  Christian  ex- 
perience ?  How  is  it  consistent  with  St.  John's  own 
gentleness  to  most  flagrant  offenders  ?  How  can  it  be  left 
side  by  side  with  language  so  apparently  contradictory 
to  it  as  that  which  uro-es  God's  children  to  confess  their 
sin,  and  even  lays  it  down  that, 

''If  ive  say  that  we  have  no  sin,  ive  deceive  ourselves, 
and  the  truth  is  not  in  us."  ^ 

Does  not  the  only  solution  lie  in  the  fact  that  here 
too,  St.  John  is  moving  in  the  regions  of  the  ideal,  and 
that  every  sin  is,  in  its  ultimate  issue,  in  its  final  nature, 
Satanic?  As  children  of  God  we  cannot  sin,  and 
children    of   God  we   are.     We    are   so   by  His    gift,^ 

1  1  John  iii.  4—10.  '  i.  8—10.  ^  iij.  i. 


388  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

we  must  become  so  by  our  own  act.  In  so  far  as 
we  by  our  own  choice  are  sinners,  so  far  we  are  not 
children  of  God ;  and  if,  at  the  last  day — if,  in  the 
general  and  unerring  sentence  of  judgment  pronounced 
upon  us — we  are  declared  to  be  in  a  state  of  permanent 
and  loilling  sin}  then,  in  spite  of  the  imparted  gift 
of  sonship,  we  are  children  of  the  Devil.  The  ideal  of 
our  position  as  children  of  God  is  the  impossibility  to  sin ; 
and  a  nearer  and  nearer  approximation  to  this  ideal 
is  required  of  us  in  actual  life.  Bat  if  to  the  very  end 
we  fall  very  far  short  of  that  ideal,  and  so  might  be 
driven  to  despair,  St.  John  himself  has  saved  us  from  any 
such  despair  by  his  previous  sayings  that  if  we  confess 
our  sins  God  will  forgive  them,"  and  that  if  any  man 
sin  we  have  an  Advocate  with  the  Father,  Jesus  Christ 
the  righteous,  and  He  is  the  propitiation  for  our 
sins.^ 

5.  The  personal  question  indeed  remains.  " If  loe  say 
that  we  have  fellowship  loith  Him,  and  walk  in  the  dark- 
ness, we  lie."  "He  who  doefh  sin  is  of  the  Devil."  ''If 
any  one  come  to  you  and  bring  not  this  teaching,  receive 
him  not  into  your  house,  and  give  him  no  greeting."  ^ 
Are  those  the  accents  of  the  Apostle  of  Love  ?  Does  not 
St.  John  by  such  expressions  and  such  advice  reopen  the 
floodgates    of   party  railing,    ignorant    zeal,   malignant 

1  Tho  force  of  tlio  prosont  teusos,  aud  tlie  alleviation  whicli  they  iu- 
troduce  into  tho  force  of  tho  sentences,  must  not  be  overlooked. 

2  i.  9. 

^  ii.  12.  Wo  may  remark  in  passing  that  this  word  "  propitiation  " 
(tAotr/oibs)  (here  and  in  iv.  10),  is  one  of  the  very  few  which  introduce  into 
the  Epistle  conceptions  which  are  not  directly  touched  upon  in  tho 
Gospels.  Another  is  xp^cM*,  the  "  unction  "  of  the  Holy  One,  in  ii.  20,  27. 
Another  is  tlie  application  of  the  name  Paraclete  ("advocate")  to  Christ 
(ii.  1),  though  this  is  indeed  involved  iu  John  xiv.  16. 

*  See  infra  iu  the  remarks  on  this  passage* 


SIN    OF    INTOLERANCE.  389 

persecution,  bitter  intolerance  ?  So,  at  any  rate,  those 
have  thought  who  forget  that  hatred  of  any  kind  is  the 
essential  note  of  the  world.  Those  very  "  texts  "  have 
been  seized  with  avidity  by  the  fierce  party-spirit  which 
all  the  Apostles  alike  so  unhesitatingly  denounce  as 
"godless  and  anti-Christian.  Heated  controversialists 
have  revelled  in  the  imaginary  license  to  set  aside 
all  the  precepts  of  Christian  love  which  breathe  from 
every  page  of  the  New  Testament  in  order  that  they 
may,  with  these  texts,  bless  and  approve  with  sober 
brows  the  very  sin  which  is  never  more  deadly  or  more 
inexcusable  than  when  it  shamelessly  intrudes  into  the 
•sphere  of  religious  life.  All  that  can  be  said  is  that  such 
partisans  wrest  these,  as  they  do  also  the  other  Scriptures, 
to  their  own  perdition.  These  phrases,  rightly  under- 
stood, belong  to  that  sphere  of  the  Ideal  and  the 
Abstract  in  which  St.  John  moves,  but  in  which  those 
do  not  move  who  pervert  his  meaning  in  order  to  undo 
the  teaching  which  he  loved  best.  No  texts  in  Scrip- 
ture can  authorise  any  man  to  hate  and  persecute  those 
who  teach  the  truths  which  he  in  his  ignorance  regards 
as  heresy.  St.  John's  words  do  not  confer  on  persecuting 
zeal  the  attribute  of  infallibility.  They  do  not  exempt 
religious  differences  from  the  realm  of  Christian  charity. 
If  they  did,  they  would  have  to  be  themselves  overruled 
as  proofs  of  weakness,  because  in  that  case  they  would  run 
counter  to  the  best  and  holiest  teachings  of  him  who  ut- 
tered them.  Eeligious  persecution,  religious  intolerance, 
religious  hatred  are  not  religious  but  irreligious,  even  if 
St.  John  be  distorted  into  their  defence.  If  he  did 
indeed  defend  them — as  he  does  not — his  plea  could 
only  be  due  to  the  still  lingering  traces  of  the  Elijah 
spirit ;    it   could   only  be   ranked  with  the  conduct  of 


390  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

St.  Carlo  Borromeo,  who,  after  tending  the  plague- 
stricken  with  the  gentleness  of  a  saint,  persecuted  those 
whom  he  regarded  as  heretics  with  the  fury  of  an 
inquisitor.  The  Apostle  and  Evangelist  of  Love  would 
have  destroyed  the  very  essence  of  his  own  divinest 
work  if  he  had  meant — as  I  believe  he  never  meant 
— to  gratify  the  meanest  and  fiercest  champions  of 
party  in  the  indulgence  of  exactly  those  forms  of  hatred 
which  have  ever  been  the  most  virulent,  the  most 
ignorant,  the  most  hateful,  and  the  most  intense. 

6.  I  will  mention  only  one  more  characteristic  of  this 
rich  and  profound  Epistle,  which  is,  that  though  it  is 
ethical  and  didactic,  it  does  not  resemble  the  treatment 
of  ethics  by  any  other  of  the  Apostles.  Here,  again,  the 
manner  of  the  writer  finds  a  fresh  illustration.  Other 
Apostles  enter  into  many  details,  touch  on  many  succes- 
sive duties.  Not  so  St.  John.  In  his  view  two  words 
enclose  the  Avhole  cycle  of  moral  conceptions.  Those 
two  words  are  Righteousness  and  Love.  Both  words 
have  their  roots  in  the  divine.  God  is  righteous.  God 
is  love.  Therefore  man  must  be  righteous  towards  God, 
and  must  manifest  that  righteousness  by  love  towards 
the  brethren.  Even  these  broad  conceptions  are  lost  in 
others  still  broader — namely,  those  of  Light  and  Truth. 
God  is  Light,  and  therefore  every  sin  partakes  of  the 
nature,  and  belongs  to  the  realm,  of  darkness.  God  is 
True — i.e..  Real,  and  therefore  all  sin  partakes  of  the 
nature  of  unreality  and  falsehood.  All  details,  all 
special  applications  are  involved  in  this.  He  who  does 
the  truth,  he  Avho  walks  in  the  light,  he  wdio  does 
righteousness,  he  who  confesses  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ,  he  who  loves  his  brother — he  has  eternal  life. 
He  will  therefore  need  no  instruction  as  to  outward  and 


TREATMENT    OF    ETHICS.  391 

individual  acts.^  For  him  even  tlie  Cliurcli  and  tlie 
Sacraments,  and  all  ecclesiastical  questions  of  organisa- 
tion and  ritual,  may,  in  St.  John's  manner,  be  passed 
over  as  "  silent  presuppositions."  He  is  forgiven;  he  is 
cleansed ;  he  is  a  son  of  God.  His  faith  in  the  D'vinity 
of  Christ  is  transposed  into  life,  and  his  life  in  Christ 
deepens  his  faith  in  Christ's  Divinity.  The  two  are 
inextricably  interlaced.  A  righteous  life  is  the  result  of 
faith,  and  faith  is  deepened  by  a  righteous  life.^  He 
who  denies  Christ,  he  who  "  severs  Christ,"  is  of  the 
Devil,  and  belongs  to  the  lie,  the  world,  the  darkness. 
Thus  St.  John  moves  as  through  the  empyrean  in  the 
region  of  absolute  antitheses.  All  controversy  is  over 
for  him.  Like  an  eagle  after  one  vast  beat  of  his  wings, 
so  this  "  own  eagle  of  Christ " 

"Scindit  iter  liquidum  celeres  neque  promo  vet  alas." 

1  See  ii.  27.  Hence  the  constant  words  o'lSare  (ii.  20;  iii.  5,  15), 
otSa/iif  (iii.  2,  14;  v.  15,  18,  19,  20),  yivdo-Kofieu  (ii.  5,  18;  iii.  19,  24; 
iv.  6,  13 ;  V.  2),  iyvtvKafjiev  (iii.  16  ;  iv.  16),  iyvdoKare  (ii.  13,  14),  yiuciaKerf 
(ii.  29;  iv.  2),  SoKtfidCere  (iv.  1).  Thus  the  thought  that  they  already  know 
the  truth  of  what  he  is  saying  recurs  some  thirty  times.  OlSa  represents 
knowledge  generally;  yivwaKw  represents  " recogintion,"  "experiential 
knowledge." 

2  Braune  (in  Lauge's  BibelwerJc),  lutrod.  §  II. ;  Hofmann.  Schrift- 
beweis,  p.  337. 


CHAPTEE  XXXIV. 

OBJECT    AND    OUTLINE    OF   THE   FIRST   EPISTLE   OF    ST.  JOHN. 

"  Sed  Joauues  ala  bina 
Caritatis,  aquiliiia 
Forma  fertar  in  diviua 

Puriori  lumiuo." — Adam  de  St.  Yictobe. 

After  these  considerations  we  shall,  I  trust,  be  better 
prepared  to  understand  St.  John's  object  in  the  Epistle, 
and  how  it  bears  on  the  circumstances  in  which  the 
Epistle  was  written.  We  shall  be  better  able  to  under- 
stand that  it  is  a  coherent  whole,  and  that  its  purpose  is 
worked  out  in  continuous  development. 

As  to  the  object,  we  can  have  no  doubt,  because 
St.  John  tells  it  to  us  quite  distinctly  in  the  first  four 
verses.  It  was  to  set  forth  to  his  readers  his  witness 
respecting  the  Word  of  Life,  in  order  that  he  and  they 
might  have  fellowship  with  one  another  in  their 
common  fellowship  with  the  Father  and  with  His 
Son,  and  that  in  consequence  of  this  their  joy  may 
be  full.  He  expresses  the  same  object  in  other  terms 
at  the  end  of  the  Epistle,  when  he  says  "  These 
things  I  have  written  to  you  that  believe  on  the  name 
of  the  Son  of  God,  that  ye  may  know  that  ye  have 
eternal  life."^     In  pursuing  this   object  he  shows  that 

^  V.  13.  The  readiug  of  B  is  here  most  pi'obably  correct,  aud  the 
source  of  the  other  variations — ravra  eypa\pa  (epistohiry  aorist)  v>ji/  iya 
tiSrjTe  '6ti  {.'corjj'  ex*'''*  olwviov,  toIs  -niaTivovaiv  tts  rb  vvofxa  tov  vlov  tov  ©eov. 
Compare  the  closely-aualogous  descriptiou  of  the  object  of  the  Gospel  in 
John  XX.  31. 


METHOD    OF    THE    EPISTLE.  393 

there  can  be  no  fellowship  with  God  without  righteous- 
ness, rooted  in  faith  and  manifested  by  love  ;  and  that 
the  Christian  not  only  ought  to  live  such  a  life,  but  does 
so,  because  he  is  born  of  Grod.  Thus  does  St.  John 
refute  the  antichristian  lie  which  was  already  prevalent. 
He  would  empty  these  souls  of  falsehood  by  filling 
them  with  truth.  He  writes  in  order  that,  by  fellow- 
ship with  one  another  and  with  Grod  and  His  Christ — 
by  perfected  joy,  by  assured  confidence  in  their  present 
possession  of  eternal  life — the  seductions  of  the  teaching 
of  antichrists  may  become  impossible  to  souls  filled  with 
Christian  love. 

An  analysis  of  the  Epistle,  such  as  may  serve 
to  show  that  it  is  not  merely  aphoristic,  is  perfectly 
possible.  When  Calvin  spoke  of  it  as  containing 
"  doctrine  mixed  with  exhortation ;  "  when  Episcopius 
said  that  "  the  method  of  treatment  was  arbitrary, 
and  not  bound  to  rules  of  art ; "  they  had  missed 
its  meaning.  The  art  is  concealed,  but  it  is  consum- 
mate. The  method  is  unique,  but  it  is  most  power- 
ful. It  is  an  entire  mistake  to  speak  of  the  Epistle 
as  "  incoherent,"  as  a  congeries  of  scattered  remarks 
about  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  about  the  blessings 
of  adoption,  about  love,  and  as  "  briefly  touching  on 
other  things  also,  such  as  being  on  our  guard  against 
impostors,    and    such  matters."^      Schmid,    Oporinus," 

1  "  Doctrinam  exhortationibus  mistarn  continet  .  .  .  sparsim  docendo 
et  exhortando  varius  est "  (Calvin). 

*  Joachim  Oporin,  in  a  Gottingeu  programme.  "  De  constanter  tenenda 
communione  cum  Patre  et  Filio — i.e.,  Joannis  Ep.  i.  nodis  interpretum 
liberata,  c&c,"  1741.  Some  have  called  the  Epistle  aphoristic,  which  is  a 
misleading  term  if  meant  to  exclude  the  notion  of  a  definite  jilau.  The 
idea  seized  upon  by  Oporin  is  certainly  the  leading  one  of  the  Epistle.  So 
too  Liicke — "  As  the  ground  and  root  of  all  Christian  fellowship  is  the 


394  THE  EARLY    DATS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

Bengel,  and  the  other  scholars  who  first  endeavoured  to 
prove  its  consecutive  and  systematic  character,  ren- 
dered a  real  service  to  biblical  theology.  The  student 
who  reads  it  in  the  light  of  some  well-considered  scheme, 
will  gain  more  advantage  from  it  than  others,  even  if 
details  of  his  scheme  be  untenable.  It  is,  for  instance, 
very  tempting  to  arrange  the  Epistle  under  the  three 
heads  which  are  suggested  by  the  three  great  thoughts 
that  God  is  Light,  God  is  Righteous,  God  is  Love.  I 
myself  tried  hard  to  do  so  in  first  studying  the  Epistle. 
But  though  these  great  utterances  throw  some  light  on 
the  order  of  thought,  it  is  evident  that  they  are  not  the 
pivots  of  arrangement  in  the  mind  of  the  writer.^  Nor, 
again,  is  it  possible  to  analyse  the  Epistle,  as  Bengel 
endeavoured  to  do,  with  reference  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  an  attempt  into  which  that  great  theologian  was 
misled  by  his  acceptance  as  genuine  of  the  verse  about 
the  Three  Heavenly  Witnesses.  There  is,  indeed,  as 
we  shall  see,  a  remarkable  triplicity  in  the  subordinate 
divisions,  due  to  the  Hebraic  training  of  St.  John,  and 
to  the  rhythm  and  symmetry  of  the  sacred  idioms  with 
which  he  was  familiar.  Bengel,  of  course,  rightly  saw 
that  the  Epistle  falls  at  once  into  the  three  divisions  of 

Exordium,  i.  1 — 4. 

Treatment  of  the  Subject,  i.  5 — v.  12. 

Conclusion,  v.  13 — 21. 
But  the  unreality  of  his  other  divisions  arose  from  his 
attempting  to  analyse  the  Epistle  in  the  interests  of  an 
a  priori  conception  instead  of   following   step  by  step 

fellowsliip  which  each  has  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  in  faith  and  love, 
60  this  latter  necessarily  unfolds  and  oxhibits  itself  in  that  former." 

^  Huther,  who,  in  his  first  edition,  in  Meyer's  Commentary,  adopted  an 
analysis  on  this  plan  (at  De  Wette's  suggestion),  abandoned  it  in  his 
second  edition. 


WAVES    OF    THOUGHT.  395 

its  own  indications.  The  reason  why  it  is  so  difficult 
to  analyse,  is  the  extreme  richness  and  fulness  of  the 
thoughts,  and  the  manner  in  which  they  interfuse  each 
other.  I  said  just  now  that  the  leading  words  of 
St.  John — words  expressive  of  some  inexhaustible  and 
abstract  idea — might  be  compared  to  stones  thrown  into 
a  lake,  which  raise  around  them  a  far-spreading  con- 
centric ripple  ;  but  of  this  Epistle  it  would  be  even 
truer  to  say  that  word  after  word  exercises  its  influence 
over  the  surface,  and  that  the  innumerable  ripples 
which  they  create  overflow  and  are  influenced  by  each 
other,  so  that  the  concentric  rings  of  thought  are  broken 
and  interlaced.^  Hence  it  is  probable  that  no  analysis 
will  be  accepted  by  any  careful  student  as  final  or  un- 
objectionable in  all  its  details.  Let  each  perform  the 
task  as  he  thinks  best ;  but  for  myself  I  can  find  no 
analysis  so  helpful  and  thorough  as  that  which  has  been 
indicated  by  one  of  the  latest,  and  by  far  the  pro- 
foundest,  expositor   of   the    epistle,   Eric   Haupt.^      In 

1  I  find  that  Hutlicr  lias  expressed  exactly  the  same  thought  under  a 
completely  different  image.  Ho  says  that  in  St.  John's  style  "  the  leading 
thought  is  like  a  key-note,  which  he  strikes  and  causes  to  sound  through 
the  derivative  thoughts  until  a  new  key-note  is  struck  that  leads  to  a  new 
key." 

2  Generally  speaking,  throughout  this  and  my  former  books  on  the 
New  Testament,  I  have,  I  trust,  shown  that  my  line  of  thought  is  always 
independent ;  that  I  have  tried  in  each  instance  to  think  and  to  judge  for 
myself,  nullius  addidus  jurare  in  verba  magistri.  It  is  right,  however, 
to  say  that  in  the  exegesis  of  the  First  Epistle  of  St.  John  I  have  been 
guided  to  an  unusual  extent  by  the  admirable  treatise  of  Haupt.  I  have 
not  always  agreed  with  him.  At  times  he  seems  to  me  to  be  over-subtle. 
I  do  not  always  accept  his  views  of  scholarship.  But  though  I  have  also 
studied  the  \aews  of  many  other  editors — Huther,  Diisterdieck,  Ebrard. 
Braune,  Alford,  "Wordsworth,  Eeuss,  &c. — I  have  not  found  in  any  one  of 
them  the  depth  and  insight  of  this  little-known  writer.  I  have,  therefore, 
been  specially  indebted  to  him,  and  desire  thus  generally  to  express  my 
obligation.     From  Reuss  I  have  gained  scai'cely  any  help.     His  treatment 


396  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

giving-  it,  however,  I  must  remind  the  reader  that  we 
do  not  pretend  to  imply  that  St.  John,  in  writing  the 
Epistle,  had  any  such  scheme  definitely  before  him, 
but  only  that,  in  the  development  of  the  great  central 
thoughts  which  lie  desired  to  impress  upon  his  readers, 
one  general  object  dominated  through  all  the  separate 
passages,  and  coloured  the  particular  expressions. 

Introduction,  i.  1 — 4. 

A.  The  main  theme — Eternal  Life  manifested  by  the 

Word. 

B.  Certain  assurance  of  this  as  an  irrefragable  truth  ; — 

the  object  of  setting  it  forth  being  that  it  is  the 
ground  and  root  of  Christian  fellowship  with  God 
and  with  one  another. 

A.   Eternal  Lifp],  i.  5 — v.  5. 

I.  The  evidence  that  it  has  been  communicated  to 
us  by  the  Word  is  Walking  in  the  Light,  which  must 
show  itself — 

1.  Towards  God — in  the  form  of  sinlessness  (i.  6 — 

ii.  2.) 

a  Sinlessness    is    effected   positively   by   re- 
demption through  Christ's  blood  (i.  5 — 7). 
^  Negatively,   by   forgiveness    of    past    sin 

(i.  8—10). 
7  Hortative  recapitulation  (ii.  1,  2). 

2.  Towards     the    brethren — as    brotherly   love    (ii. 

3—13). 

a  Keeping    God's    commandments    is   union 
with  God  (ii.  3—5). 

of  tho  Johannine  writings  in  his  Theologie  Johanniqne  seems  to  bo 
decidedly  poor,  and  far  inferior  to  liis  troutinont  of  the  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul.     Nor  have  I  learnt  much  from  the  wordy  obscurity  of  Braune. 


ANALYSIS    OF    THE    EPISTLE.  397 

/5  Love  as  the  new  commandment  (ii.  6 — 11). 
7  Hortative  encouragement  (ii.  12 — 14). 
3.  By  utter  severance  from  the  world. 

a  No    fellowship    with    the    world   or    with 

Antichrist  (ii.  15—19). 
^  Security  by  means  of  the  unction  from  the 

Holy  One  (ii.  20—26). 
7  Eecapitulation  (27). 

II.  If  we  possess  Eternal  Life  we  have  confidence, 
because  we  have  been  born  of  God  (ii,  28 — v.  5). 

1.  The  evidence  of  this  sonship  is  seen  in  action  (iii.). 

a  Towards    God  it  is    evidenced    by    doing 

righteousness  (iii.  1 — 10). 
13  Towards  the  brethren,  by  love  (iii.  11 — 18). 
7  Recapitulation  (iii.  19 — 23). 

2.  The  source  of  this  sonship  is  the  reception  of  the 

Spirit  of  God. 

a  The  confession  of  Christ  through  the  Spirit 

saves  us  from  false  Spirits  (iv.  1 — 6). 
^  Human  love  is  a  reflection  of  the  Divine,, 
and  is  derived  from  the  Spirit  (iv.  7  — 
12). 
7  Eecapitulation  (iv.  14 — 16). 
Retrospective  conclusions : — when  the  Divine  birth 
is  thus  manifested  in  action  (iii.),  which  may  be  traced 
back  to  the  Spirit,  (iv.  1 — 6),  then  we  have  the  perfect 
confidence  of  sonship,  and  may  stand  unabashed  in  the 
Day  of  Judgment  (iv.  17,  18). 

III.  Final  illustrations. 
A.  Love  and  Faith. 

a  The  Idea  of  Love  embraces  love  both  to  God  and 
to  the  brethren  (iv.  19 — 21). 


398  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF  CHRISTIA^^ITY. 

/9  The  Idea  of  Faith  involves  love  both  to  God  and 

to  the  brethren  (v.  1 — 3). 
7  And  also  involves  Victory  over  the  world  (v.  4,  5). 

B.  Assurance  that  the  Word  is  the  Giver  of  Eternal 

Life. 
i.  Because  it  is  founded  on  the   certain  witness  of 

God  (v.  6—9). 
ii.  And  this  witness  is  echoed  from  within  (v.  10 — 

12). 

C.  Conclusion. 

«■  The  substance  of  Eternal  Life,  as  consisting  of 
faith  in  Christ,  and  confidence,  and  intercessory 
love  (v.  13—17). 

/3  The  signatures  of  the  child  of  God  (v.  18—20) 
in  the  threefold  knowledge  that  he  is  sinless, 
that  he  is  from  God,  that  he  is  in  Christ. 

7  Emj)hatic  conclusion,  showing  the  practical  aim 
of  the  Epistle.^ 

I  have  inserted  this  formal  analysis  of  the  Epistle 
into  the  text,  and  not  placed  it  in  a  note,  because  of  its 
great  importance,  and  because  it  illustrates  to  no  small 
extent  the  characteristics  of  St.  John's  method,  and  the 
colouring  of  his  thoughts.  Some  may  be  inclined  to 
look  on  it  with  suspicion,  from  the  very  fact  of  its  pre- 
vailing triplicity  ;  and  no  doubt  this  might  be  justly 
regarded  as  unfavourable  to  its  reception  if  we  pretended 
to  imply  that  St.  John  drew  up  beforehand  any  outline 
of  this  definite   division.     Had  he  done  so,  it  would  at 

1  It  would  only  confuse  the  reader  to  give  the  analyses  of  Hofmann, 
Ebrard,  Huther,  &c.  Ewald  adopts  three  di^-isions,  i.  1 — ii.  17 ;  ii.  18 — 
It.  6 ;  iv.  7 — v.  21.  Diisterdieck,  closely  followed  by  Alford,  who  gives 
his  analysis  at  length,  divides  as  follows — Exordium,  i.  1 — 4 ;  two  main 
sections,  i.  5 — ii.  28 ;  ii.  29 — v.  5 ;  a  double  conclusion  v.  6 — 13,  1-i — 21. 


TRIPLICITT    OF    STRUCTURE.  399 

once  have  stamped  his  Epistle  with  formalism  of  state- 
ment and  want  of  spontaneity.  Bat  this  is  not  the 
case.  The  triplicity  is  entirely  unintentional.  It  is  so 
little  insisted  on,  that  some  of  the  sections,  and  especially 
the  minor  divisions  which  I  have  not  here  pointed  out, 
fall  into  pairs.  The  detection  of  this  involuntary  tri- 
plicity and  duality  of  statement  does  not  arise  from  any 
a  priori  determination  to  find  it,  but  results  naturally 
from  careful  study  of  the  Epistle  step  by  step.  The  very 
same  peculiarity  is  observable  in  the  Grospel.  Any  one 
who  analyses  it  sees  at  once  that  there  is  scarcely  one, 
either  of  its  main  or  its  minor  divisions,  which  does  not 
fall  into  double  or  triple  parts.  This  was  pointed  out  by 
Luthardt,  and  may  be  seen  by  a  glance  at  Canon  West- 
cott's  analysis  of  the  Gospel,  though  he  does  not  ex- 
pressly allude  to  it.  As  to  the  Epistle,  "  the  order  and 
symmetry  which  pervade  all,  down  to  the  minutest 
details,  only  show  how  clearly  and  sharply  the  Apostle 
was  accustomed  to  think,  and  that,  in  consequence  of  an 
inherent  sense  of  order,  his  thoughts  grouped  them- 
selves with  facility  in  a  definite  way." 


The  genuineness  of  the  Epistle  may  be  regarded  as 
beyond  all  suspicion.  It  was  known  to  and  quoted  by 
Papias  (a.d.  140).^  There  are  unmistakable  allusions  to 
it  in  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus  (a.d;  117),  in  the  Epistle  of 
the  Churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne  (a.d.  177),  and  in 
Polycarp's  letter  to  the  Philippians."^  It  was  often 
quoted  by  Irenaius.^     There  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 

^  Euseb.  fl.  ij.  111.  39,  Kixpv'^ai  .  .  .  /J-aprvpiais  aTro  ttjs  'loodvpov  irpoTepas 
(irtaToXris. 

^  Polyc.  ad  Philipp.  7.  This  quotation  constitutes  a  strong  proof  of 
genuineness.  ^  Euseb.  H.  E.y.8;  Iren.  c.  Haer.  iii.  16,  5,  7. 


400  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

testimony  of  the  Muratorian  fragment  (circ.  a.d.  170)  is 
in  its  favour.^  It  is  translated  in  the  Peshito ;  is  con- 
stantly quoted  by  the  Fathers  of  the  third  century ;  is 
ranked  among  the  Homologoumena  by  Eusebius,^  and  is 
said  by  St.  Jerome  to  have  been  accepted  by  all  true 
Churchmen.^  This  external  evidence  combines  so  over- 
whelmingly with  the  internal,  that  we  are  not  surprised 
to  find  that  from  the  days  of  Marcion  *  (about  a.d.  140) 
and  the  Alogi  ^  down  to  the  days  of  Joseph  Scaliger,  the 
Epistle  has  been  received  with  unquestioning  reverence.^ 
The  notion  that  it  shows  signs  of  senility  is  the  super- 
ficial conclusion  of  careless  and  prejudiced  readers.  The 
endeavour  of  Baur  to  find  Montanism  in  the  Epistle,  and 
that  of  Hilgenfeld  to  prove  that  it  is  a  forgery  of  the 
middle  of  the  second  century,  need  be  no  further  debated, 
because  they  have  found  scarcely  any  followers.  And  even 
Hilgenfeld  spoke  of  the  writer  as  "  a  great  independent 
thinker,"  and  called  his  Epistle,  not  as  Baur  had  done, 
a  "  weak  imitation "  of  the  Gospel,  but  a  "  splendid 
type  "  of  it.^  The  notion  that  such  Epistles  as  this, 
and  the  Epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  Colossians  and 
the  Pastoral  Epistles  could  have  been  second-century 

^  Seo  infra. 

2  Euseb.  11.  E.  iii.  24,  25. 

^  Jer.  De  Virr.  Illustr.  9.  It  is  quoted  by  Clemens  Alexandrinus 
{Strom,  ii.  66;  iii.  32,  &c.),  TertuUian  (c.  Marc.  v.  16;  c.  Prax.  15,  &c.) 
Cyprian  (Ep.  28,  &c.),  and  pseudo-Chrysostom  [in  Matt.  xxi.  23)  says, 
airavTes  flvai  'Icoavvov  (TviJ.(p<livws  a.Tri(p7)vavT0. 

^  Mavciou  cither  did  not  know  or  rejected  the  ■\vi'itings  of  St.  John. 

*   Taxo  Se    Kal    Tas    'EiriffToKas,    ffwaSovcn    yap    abrai    rcS    EvayyeXlai    Kal    rrj 

'AiroKa^.v\f/fi  (Epiplian.  c.  Haer.  li.  34). 

^  Tlic  isolated  exception  of  Cosmas  Indicoploustes  in  the  sixth  centnry 
is  hardly  worth  mentiouiufj,  for  his  remark  is  evidently  made  in  great 
ignorance  of  the  subject.  Ho  foolishly  observes  that  "  the  majority " 
regarded  the  Catholic  Epistles  as  not  being  the  writings  of  the  Apostles ; 

a\A'  (Tepciiv  rivcov  irpfcrfivTepuv  acpfXeffrepwv. 

^  Hilgenfeld,  Das  Evang.  vnd  die  Briefe  Johannis,  1849. 


SENT  WITH  THE   GOSPEL.  401 

forgeries  is  refuted  by  the  entire  literature  of  that  century, 
whether  authentic,  or  anonymous,  or  pseudonymous. 
That  literature  is  of  a  character  incomparably  more 
feeble,  and  is  animated  by  a  spirit  incomparably  less 
divine. 

Some  have  preferred  to  regard  this  Epistle  as  a  theo- 
logical treatise,  or  a  religious  homily ;  but  the  form 
which  it  assumes,  and  the  direct  addresses  with  which 
it  abounds,  show  that  it  really  was  intended  as  an 
encyclical  letter,  addressed  neither  "  to  Parthians  "  nor 
"  to  Virgins,"  ^  but  to  the  Churches  of  Asia,  with  which 
the  Apostle  was  most  familiar.  The  conclusions  which 
have  here  been  indicated  may  be  considered  certain ; — 
namely,  that  it  was  written  towards  the  close  of  the  first 
century ;  and — which  is  a  deeply  interesting  and  sug- 
gestive circumstance — that  it  was,  in  some  instances,  at 
least,  accompanied  by  copies  of  the  Gospel,  to  which  it 
is  closely  related  in  its  tone  of  thought,  and  to  which 
it  served  as  a  practical  commentary.^ 

'  Thus  "ypacpos  occurs  seven  times,  eypai\/a  six  times,  vfiiv,  v/xe^s,  &.C., 
thirty-six  times,  rsKvia,  iraiSia  six  times,  d7a7r7;Tol  six  times,  &c.  The  uncon- 
strained style,  the  hortatoiy  tendency,  the  informal  transitions,  all  point  to 
its  epistolary  character. 

^  This  is  the  view  of  Michaelis,  Augusti,  Hug,  Thiersch,  Ebrard, 
Haupt,  &c. 


a  a 


CHAPTER  XXXV. 

THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    OF    ST.    JOHN. 

"  Ubi  Amor,  ibi  Trinitas." — S.  Aug. 

"  Locuturus  est  multa,  et  prope  omnia  de  caritate." — S.  Aug.  Expos, 
in  Ep.  Johann. 

"  The  maiu  substance  of  this  Epistle  relates  to  love." — Luther. 

"  Put  off  thy  shoes  from  off  thy  feet,  for  the  place  whereon  thou  standest 
is  holy  groimd." — Ex.  iii.  5.  ' 

SECTION  I. 

ETERNAL      LIFE. 

"  That  which  was  from  the  beginning,  which  we  have  heard,  which 
we  have  seen  with  our  eyes,  which  we  gazed  upon,  and  our  hands 
handled,^  concerning  the  Word  of  Life  ;  and  the  Life  was  mani- 
fested," and  we  have  seen  it,  and  are  witnessing^  and  announcing  to 
you  ^  that  Life — even  that  Eternal  Life  which  was  with  the  Father, 
and  was  manifested  to  us.  That  which  we  have  seen  and  have  heard 
we  announce  to  you  also,  that  ye  also  may  have  communion  with  us ; 
and  indeed  our  communion  is  with  the  Father,  and  with  His  Son, 
Jesus  Christ.*  And  these  things  we  write,^  that  your  joy  may  be 
fulfilled  "  (i.  1—4). 

1  Lllke  Xxiv.  39  :  \f/-n\a(p7]n-aTe  fxe  Kal  I'Sere.  The  word  would  be  the 
strongest  possible  refutation  of  Docetic  error.  In  Ignat.  ad  Smyrn.  4,  5, 
our  Lord  says  to  Peter  after  His  Eesurrection,  "Take,  handle  me,  and  see 
that  I  am  not  a  bodiless  spirit  "  {Sain6i/toy  da-wnarou) ;  "  and  immediately 
they  took  hold  of  Him  and  believed,  convinced  by  His  flesh  and  His 
Spirit." 

2  By  "  the  life "  is  here  meant  the  Absolute  Life,  tj  avTo^w/i,  tj 
Trr)ya.(^ov(Ta  rh   (t^v   (Sehol.,  Jolm  i.  4). 

^  The  reading  of  «  is   koI  dTrayyfWo/xfv  koI   v^^v. 

*  The  Holy  Spirit  is  not  mentioned,  l)eeause  He  is  in  us,  rather  than 
itjitli  us  (2  Cor.  xii.  13). 

^  "  There  are  two  species  of  testimony — announcement  and  writing. 
Announcement  lays  the  foundation :  writing  builds  the  superstructure  " 
(Bengel). 


THE    PROLOGUE. 


403 


We  have  here  the  introductory  theme  of  the  whole 
Epistle.  It  should  be  compared  with  the  golden  pro- 
logue of  the  Gospel  to  which  it  is  so  closely  analogous, 
and  the  knowledge  of  which  it  assumes.^  Though  St 
John  seems  to  he  labouring  with  the  desire  to  express 
a  truth  too  great  for  the  power  of  his  language  to 
utter,  the  clause,  so  far  from  being,  as  Calvin  said, 
"  abrupt  and  confused,"  is  to  the  highest  degree  preg- 
nant with  clear  and  majestic  thought.  It  compresses 
into  a  few  lines  a  world  of  meaning,  while  at  the  same 
time  it  is  steeped  in  the  deep  emotion  of  the  WTiter. 

What  he  has  to  announce — for  he  only  uses  the  plural 
as  one  of  the  Apostolic  witnesses — is  not   the  Word, 


1  John  i.  1,  2. 

ijv   irphs   Thv   UaTfpa. 


1  John  i.  1. 

'El'  apx'fi    ^v  6    Ad-yos  Koi    6  A6yos 
^v  irphs  rhv   @f6v. 

Yer.  4. 

eV  avT^  ^ccr]    ?iv    Ka\    r)   ^o)^    ?)v  rh  irepl     tov    X6yov     ttjs     ^o'^s   ,   .   .  tj 

ipws  rwv  dvQpwiTuv,   Ka\   rh    (pais    if   rfj        ^cor;     i(pav€pci>dr]     .     .     .     Kal    ecpavepcidr] 
(TKoria  (paivei.  rjfMi'. 


Yer.  14. 

Kal   iOeacrdfieda  rrjv   56^ay   avrov. 


'6  iOeaffdixeOa. 


Otliers  of  tlie  ideas  fomid  iu  tlie  prologue  of  tlie  Gospel  occur  else, 
where  in  the  Epistle.     Thus  compare — 


The  Word  was  God." 
There  Avas  the  true  light." 


i.  12, 

i.  13, 

i.  14, 


To     become      children     of 

God." 
'  Born  ....  of  God." 
The  Word  became  flesh." 


V.  20,  "  This  is  the  true  God." 
ii.    8,  "  Tlie    true    light    already 

shineth." 
iii.    1,  "  That  we  should  be  called 

children  of  God." 
v.    1,  "  Begotten  of  God." 
iv.    2,  "  Jesus   Christ   is    come   in 

the  flesh." 
iy.  12,  "  No  man  hath  bclield  God 
at  any  time." 

This  opening  clause  of  the  Epistle  resembles  that  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  iu  the  absence  of  name  and  greeting,  but  the  majestic  beginning 
of  that  Epistle  is  more  rhetorical  and  less  emotional. 
a  a  2 


i.  18,  "No  man  hath  seen  God  at 
any  time." 


404  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

but  something  respecting  Him — namely,  tliat  He  is 
the  source  from  which  all  life  streams.  In  hearing 
and  seeing  Him,  the  Apostles  had  heard  and  seen  this 
inward  significance  of  His  Person  and  of  His  acts  by 
the  immediate  perceptions  of  sense ;  and  in  gazing  on 
and  handling  Him,  as  the}^  all  did,  and  Thomas  especi- 
ally, after  His  resurrection,  they  had  learnt,  by  yet 
fuller  investigation,  that  He  is  indeed  the  Conqueror  of 
Death  and  the  Source  of  Life.  And  this  Life  of  His 
was  "  from  the  beginning,"  so  that  the  announcement 
of  it  is  as  though  he  were  now  inspired  to  write  a  new 
Book  of  Genesis,  but  one  which  dated  backwards  to  a 
yet  earlier — nay,  to  an  absolute  eternity.  Thus  the 
"  from  the  beginning "  of  the  last  book  of  the  Bible 
repeats,  but  in  even  deeper  tones,  the  "  in  the  begin- 
ning "  of  the  first  book.  The  one  speaks  of  the  Incarna- 
tion, the  other  testifies  to  the  Eternity,  of  Him  by 
whom  the  worlds  were  made. 

The  prooem  of  the  Gospel  declared  that  "  the  Word 
became  flesh,"  because  in  the  Gospel  St.  John  is  treating 
of  Christ's  person;  but  in  the  Epistle  he  says,  "the 
Life  was  manifested,"  because  he  is  about  to  deal,  not 
directly  with  His  Person,  but  with  the  influence  which 
flowed  from  it — namely,  life.  And  the  quality  of  that 
life  is  that  it  is  eternal,  i.e.  spiritual,  supratemporal. 
Divine,  seeing  that  {r^ri'^)  it  stands  in  immediate  relation 
to  (tt/jo?)  the  Father,  and  was  only  manifested  to  man, 
in  its  priority  and  fulness,  when  Christ  appeared.  This 
was  the  Life  which  the  Apostles  had  seen,  to  which  they 
bore  witness  as  true,  which  they  were  communicating  to 
the  world,  and  of  which  the  assurance  could  be  derived 
from  their  testimony.  And  the  aim  of  the  announce- 
ment is  to  establish  a  fellowship  between  the  witnesses 


FELLOWSHIP    WITH    GOD.  405 

and  those  who  received  their  witness ;  for  indeed  this 
fellowship  is,  in  reality,  a  fellowship  with  God  and  with 
Christ.  If  it  be  asked  how  it  could  be  St.  John's  object 
to  establish  a  fellowship  which  they  j)ossessed  already, 
the  simple  answer  is  one  which  applies  to  all  the  writings 
of  the  Apostles.  They  wrote  to  Christians,  who  were 
indeed,  as  Christians,  ideally  perfect,  but  in  whom  the 
ideal  was  as  yet  very  far  from  having  become  the  real. 
Ideally  they  were  saints  and  perfect ;  in  reality  they 
were  struggling  with  daily  imperfections,  and  had  not 
by  any  means  attained  the  measure  of  the  fulness  of  the 
stature  of  Christ.  They  were,  therefore,  far  from  that 
fulness  of  joy  which  was  their  proper  heritage.^  The 
Eternal  Life  which  they  possessed  was  as  yet  but  in  the 
germ. 

"And  this  is  the  message2  which  we  have  heard  from  Him,  and 
are  announcing  to  you,  that  God  is  Light,  and  there  is  not  in  Him 
any  darkness  of  any  kind.  If  we  say  that  we  have  fellowship  with 
Him,  and  are  walking  in  the  darkness,  we  lie,  and  do  not  the  truth. 
But  if  we  walk  in  the  Light,  as  He  is  in  the  Light,^  we  have  fellow- 
ship with  one  another,*  and  the  blood  of  Jesus,  His  Son,  cleanseth  us 
from  all  sin  "5  (i.  5—7). 

1  Comp.  John  xv.  11 ;  xvii.  3 ;  Phil.  ii.  2.  "  Quorum  gaudium  tu  ipso 
es.  Et  ipsa  est  beata  vita  gaudere  ad  te,  de  te,  propter  te  "  (Aug.  Conf. 
X.  22).  "  The  peace  of  reconciliation,  the  blessed  consciousness  of  son- 
ship,  the  happy  gro^vth  in  holiness,  tlie  bright  prospect  of  future  comple- 
tion and  glory,  all  these  are  but  details  of  that  which  is  embraced  by  one 
word,  Eternal  Life  "  (Diisterdieck). 

2  'AyyiXia.   (not  eV.),  A,  B,  K,  L,  &C. 

'  One  of  the  many  passages  in  which  there  is  close  aflB^nity  between  the 
thoughts  of  St.  John  and  St.  Paul  (see  Eph.  iv.  25  ;  v.  8,  9,  11—14).  We 
can  only  walk  in  the  light  (Isa.  ii.  5),  coming  into  it  out  of  darkness;  but 
the  essence  and  element  of  God's  Being  is  in  the  Light  {<pws  oIkwv 
a.Trp6<nTov). 

*  iJiiT  dWrtXwv  («,  B,  &c.),  and  not  /j-er  avTov  (A),  is  the  better 
reading.  "  Chi-istian  fellowship  is  then  only  real  when  it  is  in  fellowship 
with  God  "  (De  Wette).     "  Nisi  in  bonis  amicitia  esse  nou  j)otest "  (Oic). 

6  Col.  i.  20 ;  Eph.  i.  7  ;  Heb.  ix.  14.     Christ's  Blood,  applied  by  Faith. 


406  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Into  those  words,  God  is  Light,  St.  John  compresses 
the  substance  of  his  message,  and  utters  one  of  those 
great  final  truths,  which,  since  they  cannot  be  tran- 
scended, mark  the  close  of  revelation.  It  is  not  intro- 
duced abruptly  or  disconnectedly,  but  it  requires  a 
knowledge  of  the  Gospel  to  see  its  force.  There,  too, 
and  in  the  same  order,  we  have — First,  the  Word  (i.  1), 
then  Life  (i.  4),  then  Light  (i.  5)  ;  and  there  we  see 
that  the  Light  is  the  highest  manifestation  of  the  Life 
in  relation  to  men ;  so  that  the  epitome  of  the  Gospel 
and  the  epitome  of  the  Life  of  Christ,  as  regards  the 
world,  is  this — that  the  Light  shineth  in  darkness,  and 
the  darkness  comprehended  it  not.  But,  when  man 
receives  the  Life  as  Light,  he  also  reflects  it,  and  so 
becomes  a  child  of  Light. ^  In  these  words,  therefore, 
as  in  "  God  is  Love,"  St.  John  sums  up  all  the  meaning 
of  his  Gospel,  although  in  the  Gospel  itself  neither  of 
the  two  expressions  occurs.  Yet  Christ  is  there  called 
Light,  because  He  is  one  with  the  Father,  and  because 
He  manifested  the  Father  as  Light.  "  I,"  He  said,  "  am 
the  Light  of  the  world."  ^ 

But  what  is  the  meaning  of  this  final  revelation  that 
God  is  Light  ?  The  only  answer  w^hich  we  can  give 
is  that,  of  all  existing  things,  not  one  is  so  pure,  so 
abstract,  so  glorious,  so  beneficent,  so  incapable  of  stain 
or  admixture,  as  earthly  light ;  and  earthly  light  is  but 

becomes  our  Justification,  and  is  also  the  purifying  medium  of  our  sancti- 
fication.  The  verso,  as  Bp.  Wordswoi-th  points  out,  refutes  many  lieresies 
— e.g.,  that  of  Cerintlius,  that  Jesus  was  not  the  Christ  (reading  Xpio-ToG) 
that  of  the  El)ionites,  that  He  was  not  the  Sou  of  God;  that  of  tlie 
Docetae,  that  tlio  Christ  did  not  really  die ;  that  of  the  Novatiaus,  who 
denied  pardon  to  deadly  sin  after  baptism  ;  that  of  the  Autiuomians,  who 
denied  the  necessity  of  moral  obedience. 

^  Jolm  viii.  12. 

-  John  i.  4  ;  iii.  19  ;  \'iii.  12. 


"GOD    IS    LIGHT."  407 

an   analogue  of  the   Light   which    is   immaterial   and 
Diviue. 

"  Hail,  Holy  Light !  offspring  of  heaven  firstborn, 
Or  of  the  Eternal  co-eternal  beam. 
May  I  express  thee  unblamed  1  since  God  is  Light, 
And  never  but  in  unapiDroached  Light 
Dwelt  from  eternity  :  dwelt  then  in  thee, 
Bright  effluence  of  bright  essence  uncreate ; 
Or,  hear'st  thou  rather,  pure  ethereal  stream, 
Whose  fountain  who  shall  tell  1     Before  the  sun, 
Before  the  heavens,  thou  wast." 

St.  John,  as  is  usual  with  him,  follows  the  positive 
statement  by  a  negative  one,  which  strengthens  and 
adds  to  it — "  in  Him  is  no  darkness  whatever."  The 
words  furnished  an  answer,  if  such  were  needed,  to 
Manichean  dreams ;  and  they  introduce  the  truth  that 
it  must  be  the  duty  of  the  Christian  to  walk  in  Light, 
which  is  the  same  thing  as  to  live  in  Grod.  We  are  sur- 
rounded with  elements  of  darkness  ;  but  we  are  not  to 
love  it,  nor  to  love  the  world,  which  is  the  sphere  of  its 
extension ;  we  are  to  pass  from  it,  by  heart-repentance, 
into  the  region  of  Light,  which  is  the  kingdom  of  Grod. 
If  we  have  not  done  so,  and  yet  profess  fellowship  with 
God,  our  life  is  a  lie.  In  that  case  "  we  lie  ;  "  and  to 
this  positive  he  adds  the  negative,  "  and  we  do  not  the 
truth."  The  clause  illustrates  his  manner.  It  is  not  a 
mere  antithesis  of  positive  and  negative,  but  the  addi- 
tion of  a  stronger  and  partially  new  clause,  after  the 
fashion  of  Hebrew  parallelism.  For  the  word  "truth  " 
means  something  much  more  than  that  purely  relative 
conception  which  we  ordinarily  attach  to  the  word.  We 
must  seek  the  meaning  of  it  in  such  expressions  as  St. 
Paul's  "  obeying  the  truth, "^  and  the  words  of  Jesus,  "  I 

^  Rom.  ii.  8:  2  Tliess.  i.  8. 


408  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

am  the  Truth."  ^  It  means  absolute  reality.  The 
Gnostic  dreamer — the  professing  Christian  who  talks 
about  union  with  God  and  yet  is  walking  in  darkness, 
who  wilfully  deceives  himself,  who  shrinks  in  hatred 
from  the  revealing  light — not  only  says  that  which  is 
false,  but  leads  a  life  which  is  entirely  false,  and  hollow, 
and  unreal — a  life  of  semblance  and  of  death.  But  if  we 
walk  in  the  light,  then  our  fellowship  in  light  is  per- 
lected,  and  we  are  cleansed  from  all  sin.  In  other 
words,  we  are  sanctified  by  the  blood  of  Jesus.  His 
blood  has  won  our  justification — the  forgiveness  of  our 
actual  sins  ;  His  blood — that  is,  "His  power  of  life 
working  its  effects  and  ruling  within  us  " — is  our  sancti- 
fication  from  all  sin.  And  to  be  forgiven,  and  cleansed, 
is  to  have  fellowship  with  one  another  and  with  God. 

"  If  we  say  that  we  have  no  sin,  we  mislead  ourselves,  and  the 
Truth  is  not  in  us.^  If  we  confess  our  sins,'^  faithful*  is  He  and 
Righteous,  that  He  should  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  cleanse  us  from 
all  unrighteousness.^  If  we  say  that  we  have  not  sinned,  we  make 
Him  a  liar,  and  His  Word  is  not  in  us  "  (i.  8 — 10). 

The  denial  of  sin,  the  assertion  of  our  independence 
and  perfection,  is  a  radical  abandonment  of  honesty. 
There  can  be  no  reality,  and,  therefore,  nothing  akin  to 

^  John  xiv.  6. 

'  The  councxion  is  that  we  all  need  to  bo  thus  cleansed  by  the  Blood 
of  Christ  (Irou.  c.  Haer.  i.,  vi.  20).  It  is  at  least  doubtful  whether  there 
is  any  special  allusion  to  Gnostic  Antinomiau  Perfectionists. 

^  Of  course  St.  John  means  confession  springing  from  true  contrition 
(James  v.  16). 

*  True  to  His  Nature  and  Promise  (1  Cor.  i.  9 ;  x.  13 ;  1  Thess.  v. 
24,  &c). 

6  "  In  the  background  lie  all  the  details  of  the  Redemption  "  (Alford). 
"All  sin,  original  and  actual "  (Beugol).  "Si  to  confessus  fuoris  pecca- 
toruin  est  in  te  Veritas,  nam  ipsa  Veritas  lux  est.  Nonduni  perfecte 
splenduit  vita  tua,  quia  iusuut  peccata :  sed  taineu  jam  illumiuari  oaepisti 
quia  iuost  coufessio  "  (Aug.). 


CONSCIOUSNESS    OF    SIN.  409 

the  Divine,^  in  the  man  who  makes  such  an  assertion, 
whether  it  be  dictated  by  haughty  self-sufficiency  as  to 
our  own  virtues,  or  by  Antinomian  denial  that  sin  is 
exceedino"  sinful.  But  with  consciousness  of  sin  be<]rins 
the  hope  and  possibility  of  amendment.  When  sin  is 
confessed  with  real  contrition  to  God,  and,  if  needful, 
to  men,  then — because  God  is  God,  and  is,  therefore, 
faithful  to  His  own  nature,  and  because,  as  a  Righteous 
Judge,  He  judges  uprightly — it  is  the  very  object  of  His 
righteousness  that  He  should  remit  our  past  sins,^  and 
renew  our  whole  nature.  A  denial  on  our  part  of  past 
sin  gives  the  lie  to  all  His  revelation,  and  proves  that 
His  Word  is  not  in  us. 

Having  thus  illustrated  the  truth  that  to  have 
fellowship  with  God  is  to  walk  in  the  Light,  and  that 
this  involves  our  deliverance,  alike  from  Vl).^;  principle  of 
sin  by  redemption,  and  from  the  guilt  of  sin  by  forgive- 
ness, he  sums  up  in  these  words  : — 

''My  little  cliildron,3  these  things  I  write  to  yoii  that  ye  may  not 
sin  :    and   if  any  one  have  sinned,*  we   have  an  Advocate^  to  the 

^  In  the  tract  Sauhedrin  (f.  64,  a),  there  is  a  story  that  for  three  days 
the  Israehtes  wrestled  with  the  Evil  Impulse  {Jetser-hard),  and  said  that 
God  had  permitted  this  Evil  Impulse,  that  men  might  gain  a  reward  by 
overcoming  it.  Thereupon  a  letter  dropped  from  heaven,  on  which  was 
the  word  "  Trutli."  Rabbi  Chaniua  said,  "  From  this  we  ')nay  see  that 
the  Seal  of  the  Holy  One  is  Truth." 

^  'Iva.  a<pfj  K.T.X.  "In  tliis  one  particle  ('Iva)  lies  the  most  compreheii- 
sive  and  the  highest  witness  of  God's  love  that  it  is  possible  to  conceive  " 
(Haupt,  p.  60). 

^  Tradition  has  also  preserved  this  expression  as  a  favourite  one  of 
St.  John  in  his  old  age. 

*  idv  rii  afiaprfj.     Si  qnifi  peccaverit  (Yidg.). 

^  The  word  is  used  in  this  sense  in  the  letter  of  the  Churches  of  Lyous 
and  Vienne  (Euscb.  H.  E.  v.  1),  where  a  young  Christian — Yettius  Epa- 
gathus — after  begging  to  be  heard  in  defence  of  the  martyrs,  himself 
received  tlie  martyr's  crown — 7rapo/cA.rjT09  Xpi(rriavwv  xf'JM"'''^'''"')  ^X'^"  5« 
rbv  napcK\7iTov  iv  favrcp — "  being  called  the  Advocate  of  the  Christians, 


410  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Father,  Jesus  Clirist,  as  Righteous.  And  He  is  a  propitiation  for 
our  sins,  but  not  for  ours  alone,  but  also  for  the  whole  world  "i  (ii. 
1,2). 

The  personal  address,  "my  little  cliildren,"  shows 
the  warmth  and  earnestness  of  this  recapitulation.  The 
aim  of  all  that  he  has  said  is  that  the  Christian  should 
not  sin ;  but  if  that  deliverance  be  impossible  in  its 
ideal  fulness,  if  we  do  fall  into  sins  of  infirmity,  still, 
even  then — if  only  we  are  on  our  guard  that  such  sins 
never  so  master  and  possess  our  lives  that  we  walk  in 
darkness — we  need  not  despair.^  The  best  of  all  is  not 
to  sin ;  but  if  we  cannot  attain  to  this,  there  is  a  pro- 
pitiation for  sin,  by  which — an  Advocate  for  us  to  the 
Father,  by  whom — we  may  gain  the  blessedness  of  the 
unrighteousness   forgiven,    of  the    sin   covered.       That 

but  having  the  Advocate  in  himself."  On  this  word  Canon  Westcott 
(on  St.  John  xiv.  16)  has  one  of  those  exhaustive  notes,  which  are  so 
valuable  as  tending  to  a  final  settlement  of  uncertain  questions.  The 
word  is  only  found  in  the  New  Testament  here,  and  in  John  xiv.  16,  26  : 
XV.  26 :  xvi.  7.  where  it  is  rendered  Comforter.  The  double  rendering 
dates  from  "Wiclif,  followed  by  Tyudale  and  other  versions,  except  that 
the  Rhemisli,  followiug  the  Yulgate,  uses  Paraclete  in  the  Gospel  (Luther 
has  in  the  Gospel  "  Troster,"  and  here  "  Fiirsprecher  ").  The  Latin  Fathers 
use  the  words  Paracletus,  Advocatus,  Consolator ;  and  TertuUian  (once), 
Exorator.  The  English  word  means  not  "  Comforter  "  in  the  modem 
sense,  but  "  Strengthener."  ("  Comfort  is  that  by  which  in  the  midst  of 
all  our  sorrows  we  are  comfortati — i.e.,  strengthened,"  Bp.  Andrewes.) 
The  form  of  the  word  is  passive ;  in  Classical  Greek  it  means  Advocate. 
It  is  used  in  this  sense  by  Philo  and  the  Rabbis  and  early  Christian 
writers.  The  moaning  in  this  passage  is  clear,  and  the  use  of  the  word  in 
the  sense  "  Consoler,"  by  the  Greek  Fathers  seems  only  to  be  a  secondary 
application  (Westcott,  I.  c).  It  was  necessary  for  St.  John  to  dwell  on 
the  truth  that  Christ  was  our  only  Advocate  in  churches  given  to  Angel 
worship  (Col.  ii.  18 ;  1  Tim.  ii.  5). 

1  "  Thou,  too,  art  a  part  of  the  whole  world :  so  that  thine  heart 
cannot  deceive  itself,  and  think  the  Lord  died  for  Peter  and  Paul,  but 
not  for  me  "  (Luther). 

2  "Sed  forte  surrepit  do  \\ia  humana  peccatum.  Quid  ergo  fiet  ? 
Jam  desperatio  erit  ?    Audi : — si  quis,  iuquit  peccaverit,"  &.Q.  (Aug.). 


A    PROPITIATION.  411 

Advocate^  is  righteous  in  His  nature  and  a  propitiation 
by  His  office,  so  that,  in  and  through  Him,  we  can  be 
acceptable  to  God.^  The  word  "  a  propitiation  "  {hilas- 
mos)  is  peculiar  to  St.  John,  occurring  only  here  and  at 
iv.  10.  It  is  therefore  in  the  Septuagint  that  we  must 
look  for  its  meaning,  and  there  it  is  used  as  the  trans- 
lation of  Kippurim,  "  the  Day  of  Atonement,"^  just  as 
the  corresponding  verb  to  "propitiate,"  or  "make  a 
propitiation  for,"^  is  the  standing  version  of  kipper.  It 
is  therefore  a  sacrificial  metaphor,  and  points  to  the 
same  series  of  thoughts  which  we  have  already  examined 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The  word  itself  stands 
in  close  relation  to  the  word  hilasterion,^  or  mercy-seat, 
which — sprinkled  with  the  blood  of  atonement,  and 
dimly  seen  in  the  darkness  through  the  clouds  of 
incense — was  a  type  of  the  means  whereby  man  may 
stand  redeemed  and  accepted  in  the  presence  of  God. 
The  emblem  and  the  expression  belonged  to  the  Jewish 
ritual;  but,  as  St.  John  here  adds,  Christ's  atonement 
was  not  only  for  Jews,  not  only  for  believers,  but  for 
the  whole  world.  "  Wide  as  was  the  sin,  so  wide  was 
the  propitiation." 

With  the  third  verse  of  the  second  chapter,  begins 

^  Advocate  (as  we  have  seen)  not  Comforter,  is  perhaps  always  the 
right  rendering  of  iiapaKK-qrSs.  The  word  has  been  adopted  by  the 
Talmudists  by  simple  transliteration  (iD'^p-is),  and  only  in  this  sense.  This 
is  the  only  passage  in  which  the  title  is  directly  given  to  the  Son  ;  but  it 
is  indirecthj  given  to  Him  in  John  xiv.  16,  "  I  will  send  you  another 
Comforter."  Further,  St.  John  generally  regards  and  speaks  of  the 
Paraclete  as  the  Spirit  of  Christ. 

-  "  The  righteousness  of  Clu-ist  stands  on  our  side,  for  God's  righteous- 
ness is  in  Jesus  Christ,  ours"  (Luther). 

3   DnE3. 
■*   iXdcrKfcrOai. 

^  Rom.  iii.  25  (see  Life  and  Worh  of  St.  Paul,  ii.  209),  and  see  supra 
on  Heb.  ix.  5. 


412  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

a  second  section  in  illustration  of  the  fundamental 
theme — the  vtcnnirr,  namely,  whereby  "  walking  in  the 
light,"  as  a  proof  that  we  have  eternal  life,  is  evi- 
denced. It  is  evidenced,  as  we  have  hitherto  seen,  by 
sinlessness — that  is,  by  forgiA^eness  from  the  past  guilt 
of  sin  (i.  8 — ^10),  and  deliverance  from  its  present 
power  (i.  5 — 7).  But  this  is  a  proof  that  we  are 
walking  in  the  light  with  reference  to  God.  The 
Apostle  now  proceeds  to  illustrate  how  such  a  walk 
is  evidenced  towards  wen,  and  this  occupies  the  section 
ii.  3 — 14.  In  the  first  paragraph  of  this  section  he  tells 
us  that  it  is  thus  evidenced  by  keeping  God's  command- 
ments (3 — 5)  ;  in  the  second,  he  proceeds  to  define  all 
God's  commandments  as  being  summed  up  essentially 
in  one,  namely  in  walking  as  Christ  walked,  which  (as 
the  whole  accompanying  Gospel  would  have  already  made 
clear  to  his  readers)  was  to  walk  in  love,  since  love  is 
the  epitome  of  this  life.^  This  section,  then,  is  an 
illustration  of  our  "  fellowship  with  one  another,"  as 
the  last  was  of  our  "  fellowship  with  the  Father,  and 
the  Son  Jesus  Christ ;  "  and  thus  the  two  together  are 
meant,  directly  and  consecutively,  to  promote  the  object 
which  he  has  already  placed  in  the  forefront  of  his 
Epistle  " — union  with  one  another  and  with  God.^ 

And  since  critics  have  ventured  to  talk  so  superfici- 
ally and  irreverently  of  St.  John's  tautology  and  senility, 
and  the  loose,  inconsequential  structure  of  his  Epistle, 
as  though  it  were  (as  Caligula  said  of  the  style  of 
Seneca)^  a  mere  "  rope  of  sand,"  it  maybe  well  to  set 

•  John  xiii.  3i,  35.     1  John  iii.  1. 
»  See  i.  3. 

3  The  shrewd,  though  more  tlian  half-iusano  Emperor,  said  that 
Seneca's  style  was  "  commissiones  vncras,^'  "  mere  display  "  and  "  arena 
bine  calce  " — "  saud  without  lime."' 


SYMMETRY    OF    STYLE. 


413 


visibly  before  the  reader  a  proof  of  the  extreme  colierence 
and  symmetry  which  mark  its  structure.  It  may  serve 
to  show  that  when  these  rude  critics  fancied  that  they 
"  understood  his  ignorance,"  they  were,  as  critics  so 
often  are,  merely  "  ignorant  of  his  understanding."  If 
the  reader  will  open  his  Bible  and  refer  to  the  para- 
graphs i.  5 — 10  and  ii.  3 — 11,  he  will  find  that  they 
present  the  close  and  symmetrical  parallelism  which  is 
indicated  below. 


Chaptek  i.  5. 
Subsection  a — 

General  statement, 

Ver.  6 — 

Negative    supposition,    and    two 

condemnatory  conclusions. 

Ver.  7— 

Positive     supposition,    and     two 

declarations. 

Subsection  fi — 

Three  opposed  sentences,  ver,   8, 
9,  10, 


Chapter  ii.  3. 
Subsection  a — 

General  statement, 

Ver.  4 — 

Negative    supposition,    and    two 

condemnatory  conclusions. 

Ver.  5 — 

Positive    supposition,    and    two 

declarations. 

General  statement,  ver,  6 — 8. 

Three  opposed  sentences,  ver,  9, 
10,  11. 


The  symmetry  is  not  slavishly  artificial,  but  it  is  a 
very  marked  characteristic  of  a  careful  and  meditative 
style. 

"  And  in  this  we  recognise  that  we  have  learnt  to  know  Plim,  if 
we  keep  His  commandments.  He  that  saith  I  have  learnt  to  know 
Him,  and  keepeth  not  His  commandments  is  a  liar,  and  in  him  the 
Truth  is  not.  But  whosoever  keepeth  His  Word,  of  very  truth  in 
him  the  love  of  God  has  been  perfected.  By  this  we  learn  to  know 
that  we  are  in  Him  "  (ii,  3 — 5). 

"  To  know  God  "  is  not  merely  to  know  that  He  is. 
In  St,  John's  sense  it  is  to  have  fall  knowledge  of  Him,^ 

^  The  word  iirlyvuffis,  however,  so  common  in  St.  Paul  and  in  2 
Peter,  b  not  used  by  St.  John. 


414  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

that  is,  to  receive  Him  into  the  heart.  And  thus  to 
know  Him  is  to  walk  in  the  light,  which  we  cannot  be 
doing  if  we  are  not  keeping  His  commandments.  Here, 
then,  is  a  test  for  us  as  to  whether  we  know  Him  or  not, 
a  test  as  to  our  Fellowship  with  Him.  St.  John  has 
already  told  us  (i.  6)  that 

If  we  say  that  we  have  fellowship  with  Him, 

And  walk  in  darkness, 
{a)  We  lie,  and 
(^)  Do  not  the  truth  : 
and  here,  in   closest  parallel,  but  in  stronger  form,  he 
tells  us 

He  that  saith  I  have  learnt  to  know  Him, 

And  keepeth  not  His  commandments, 
(a)  He  is  a  liar,  and 
()S)  The  truth  is  not  in  him. 
But  he  who  keepeth  God's  word — the  words  of  Him 
who  was  the  Word  and  whose  words  are  spirit  and  life^ 
• — is  truly  Christ's  disciple.  That  word,  whether  as  the 
personal  Logos  or  as  His  announcement,  is  essentially 
"  Love  ;  "  and,  therefore,  in  him  who  keeps  God's  word 
the  "  love  of  God "  has  been  perfected.  Such  a  man 
has  in  himself,  as  the  pervading  influence  of  his  life, 
the  love  which  is  in  God, — for  "  God  is  love."-  The 
thought  is  exactly  the  same  as  that  expressed  by 
St.  Paul,  in  the  Ephesians,  where,  in  the  only  passage  in 
which  he  bids  us  be  imitators  of  God,^  he  tells  us  to 
"  walk  in  love,  even  as  Christ  loved  us."  But  though 
the  fundamental  thought  is  the  same,  it  is  set  forth  by 
St.  John  in  a  more  developed,  a  more  penetrative,  and 
a  more  final  manner.     The  words,  "herein  we  learn  to 

1  Jolm  viii.  31.  '^  1  John  iv.  16.  ^  Epli.  v.  1,  2. 


BROTHERLY    LOYE.  415 

know  tliat  we  are  in  Him,"  are  a  recapitulation,  but 
one  which  adds  to  the  emphasis  with  which  a  truth  so 
important  is  announced,  and  serves  to  perfect  the  sym- 
metry between  this  section  and  the  corresponding  one 
in  the  last  chapter. 

In  the  next  paragraph  St.  John  gives  the  central 
thought,  to  which  he  has  been  drawing  nearer  and 
nearer,  namely,  that  the  ideal  unity  of  Grod's  command- 
ments is  found  in  brotherly  love ;  and  that  this,  there- 
fore, is  the  true  manifestation  of  "  walking  in  the 
light,"  as  expressed  towards  our  brethren  in  the  world. 

"  He  that  saitli  that  lie  abidetla  in  Hiin,  ought  himself  also  to 
walk  even  as  He  walked.  Beloved,  I  write  not  a  new  commandment 
to  you,  but  an  old  commandment  which  ye  had  from  the  beginning. 
That  old  commandment  is  the  word  which  ye  heard.  Again  a  new 
commandment  I  write  to  you  ;^  a  thing  which  is  a  living  reality  in 
Him  and  in  you  ;  because  the  darkness  is  passing  away,  and  the  real 
Light  is  already  shining.  He  that  saith  that  he  is  in  the  Light,  and 
hatetli  his  brother,  ^  is  in  the  darkness  even  still.  He  that  loveth 
his  brother  abideth  in  the  Light,  and  there  is  no  stumbling-block  in 
him."*     But  he  who  hateth  his  brother  is  in  the  darkness,  and  in  the 

^  The  whole  passage  is  explained  in  the  accoiupanying  comment.  It 
will  be  seen  that  I  reject  the  explanation  of  the  commandment  as  new, 
(1)  because  contimially  renewed  (Calv.) ;  or  (2)  "given  as  tliough  it  were 
new  "  (Neander) ;  or  (3)  as  unknown  before  Christ  came.  The  command- 
ment is  "  old  "  as  dating  from  the  beginning  of  Christianity ;  new  if  we 
look  back  to  all  previous  ages.     See  Dilsterdieck  and  Haupt. 

2  By  "  brothers  "  St.  John  means  in  the  first  instance  "Christians," 
but  ob\iously  he  means  to  include  those  wider  senses  which  Christ  gave  to 
the  word  "  neighbour."  In  his  method  of  regarding  all  conceptions  in 
their  ideal  and  absolute  nature,  he  only  contemplates  "  love  "  and  "  hatred," 
and  nothing  intermediate.  "  Ubi  non  est  amor,  odium  est :  cor  enim  non 
est  vacuum ''  (Bengel). 

^  "  He,"  says  Bengel,  "  who  hates  his  brother  is  a  stumbling-block  to 
himself,  and  runs  against  himself  and  against  everything  within  and 
without:  he  who  loves  has  a  smooth  journey."  See  John  xi.  9,  10.  "If 
any  man  walk  in  the  night  he  stumbleth,  because  the  light  is  not  in  him." 
The  man  who  walks  in  the  light  does  not  "  set  up  the  stumbling-block  of 
his  iniquity  before  his  own  face  "  (Ezek.  xiv.  3). 


416  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

darkness  he   walkctli,   and  knoweth   not  where  he  goeth,i  because 
darkness  blinded  his  eyes"  (ii.  6 — 11). 

The  verb  used  in  the  first  verse  of  the  clause  ex- 
presses yet  another  stage  of  fellowship  with  God — not 
only  knoicing  Him  (verse  3),  or  bein(j  in  Him  (verse  5), 
but  ahidhig  in  Him.  But  the  stronger  word  is  only 
used  to  express  a  development  in  the  conception  of 
obedience — the  walking  as  Christ  walked  To  do  this 
is  a  moral  obligation  following  necessarily  from  the  pro- 
fession of  constant  union  with  God.  The  earnest 
address,  "  Beloved,"  prepares  us  for  some  emphatic 
announcement.  St.  John  has  to  explain  the  identity 
of  "  walking  as  Christ  walked  "  with  a  commandment 
which  is  at  once  old  and  new.  The  new  and  the  old 
commandments  are  not  two  different  commandments,  but 
one  and  the  same,  namely  the  commandment  which 
they  received  from  the  beginning  of  their  Christian 
life.  It  is  an  old  commandment,  not  only  (though 
that  is  true)  because  it  is  found  even  in  the  Old 
Testament — for  the  letter  is  addressed  to  the  Gentiles ; 
but  because  it  is  as  old  as  the  whole  message  of  the 
Gospel  to  them — "  the  entire  word  about  the  personal 
Word  "  which  they  received  in  the  Apostolic  preaching. 
But  if  Love  was  thus,  even  to  these  Gentile  Christians, 
an  old  commandment,  seeing  that  they  had  heard  it 
all  along,  in  what  sense  was  it  new  ?  We  might  be 
left — as  St.  John's  readers  would  have  been — merely 
to  conjecture  the  answer,  if  the  Epistle  had  not  de- 
pended upon  a  knowledge  of  the  Gospel.  But  turning 
to  the  Gospel  w^e  find  the  new  commandment  there, 

^  "  It  nescius  in  Gehennam,  ignarus  et  caecus  praecipitatur  iu  poeuam  " 
(Cyprian). 


"A  NEW  COMMANDMENT."  417 

and  also  the  occasion  on  which  our  Lord  delivered  it. 
In  that  sweet  and  solemn  discourse  which  He  uttered 
after  He  had  washed  His  disciples'  feet,  and  which  was 
intended  to  explain  that  act  of  sovereign  condescension, 
He  said,  "  A  new  commandment  I  am  giving  to  you, 
that  ye  love  one  another ;  as  I  loved  you  that  ye  also 
love  one  another.  In  this  shall  all  recognise  that  ye 
are  my  disciples,  if  ye  have  love  for  one  another."' 
All  readers  of  the  Epistle  in  reading  the  phrase,  "  a 
new  commandment,"  would  be  at  once  reminded  of 
the  passage  which,  in  all  probability,  they  had  just 
read  in  the  Gospel,  and  would  see  the  analogy  between 
**  walking  as  Christ  walked,"  and  "  loving  as  Christ 
loved."  Again  and  again,  both  in  parables  and  in 
direct  exhortation,  Christ  had  bidden  them  love  one 
another,  and  yet  the  commandment  became  a  new 
commandment  with  reference  to  the  time  and  the 
manner  in  which  it  was  then  delivered.  For,  on  the 
one  hand,  He  had  never  before  bidden  them  to  love 
as  He  loved,  and,  on  the  other.  His  act  in  washing 
their  feet  had  set  brotherly  love  in  a  light  entirely 
new.  It  was  an  act  of  love,  altogether  exceptional 
and  transcendent,  as  St.  John  in  the  Grospel  had 
emphatically  pointed  out.^  For  the  Lord  Himself 
had  called  attention  to  its  import  in  the  question, 
"  Do  ye  recognise  the  meaning  of  what  I  have  done 
to  you  ?  I  gave  you  an  example,  that  as  /  did  to  you, 
so  ye  also  should  ever  do."^  It  was  an  act  of  love  in 
its  supremest  energy — an  instantia  ehicescens  of  love 
which  could  not  be  surpassed.  All  His  previous  acts 
of  love  had  been  the  loving  acts  of  One  infinitely  above 
them — of  one   whom  they  called,   and  who  was,  their 

J  John  xiii.  31,  35.  «  xiii.  1.  3  ^iii,  jo,  1.5. 

b  b 


418  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Teacher  and  Lord.  This  was  an  act  done  as  though 
He  were  their  minister  and  slave.  All  other  acts  had 
been  acts  which,  as  it  were,  He  must  have  done  in 
accordance  with  His  nature  ;  which,  if  He  had  7iot  done, 
He  would  not  have  reflected  the  perfectness  of  His 
own  nature.  But  this  was  not  an  act  which  could 
have  been  expected ;  it  was  an  act  supremely  astonish- 
ing; it  arose,  not  as  it  were  from  the  law  of  any 
moral  obligation,  but  from  love  acting  as  an  immeasur- 
able impulse.  This,  then,  is  the  love  which  furnishes 
the  essence  of  the  new  commandment :  not  that  love 
only  which  must  ever  be  the  first  rule  of  Christian 
exhortation,  but  the  love  which  ever  advances  to  per- 
fectionment,^  and  so  works  out  the  perfect  joy  into 
which  it  was  one  of  the  Apostle's  objects  to  lead  his 
readers. 

When  he  proceeds  to  say  that  this  new  command- 
ment is — is  ah'eady — a  "  true  thing,"  as  being  alive 
in  i/iem,  as  it  was  in  Christ,  we  might  perhaps  be 
once  more  driven  to  ask,  "What,  then,  is  the  necessity  for 
impressing  it  upon  them?"^  The  answer,  as  before, 
is  one  which  applies  to  every  one  of  the  Epistles.  It 
is  a  question  which  meets  us  at  every  turn  in  the 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  where  there  is  often  so  glaring  a 
contrast  between  what  Cliristians  ou(/ht  to  be,  and  are 
asserted  ideally  to  be,  and  what  they  really  are. 
Christians  can  only  be  addressed  as  Christians,  as 
having  entered  into  the  hopes  of  Christians,  as  en- 
joying the  privileges  of  Christians,  as  being  Christians 
not  only  in  name  but  in  deed  and  in  truth.  If  then 
they  were  Christians  they  were  "  in  Christ  "  ;  and  if 
they  were  in  Christ  they  were  walking  as  He  walked, 

^  Heb.  ri.  1.  *  See  supra,  p.  405. 


LOVE,  AS  A  TEST.  419 

and  therefore  walking  in  love.  The  love  which  was 
a  real  thing  in  Him,  was  necessarily  also  a  real  thing 
in  them.  St.  John  could  not  address  them  as  though 
they  were  not  that  which,  as  the  very  meaning  of  their 
whole  lives,  they  were  professing  to  be.  And,  indeed, 
this  is  the  reason  which  he  gives.  The  Love,  he  says, 
which  is  the  new  commandment,  is  a  verity  in  Him 
and  in  you,  because  ye  are  children  of  the  Light,  and 
therefore  the  darkness  is  passing  away.  For  all  who 
were  truly  in  Christ,  that  darkness  must  soon  have  passed 
away  altogether ;  for  not  only  was  "  the  night  far 
spent,  and  the  day  at  hand,"^  but  the  night  was 
actually  over,  and  the  day  had  dawned.  The  very 
Light — Christ  who  is  the  Light — was  shining  already  ; 
shining  not  only  in  them  but  in  the  world.  For  the 
world  is  the  universal  realm  of  darkness,  but  in  Him  the 
Light  is  concentrated  in  its  very  essence  and  fulness.^ 

And  then  very  plainly  the  Apostle  furnishes  them 
with  a  test  of  their  professions.  Love,  he  tells  them,  is 
the  sign  whether  or  not  the  Truth  is  in  them,  whether 
or  not  they  are  in  the  Light,  whether  or  not  they  are 
walking  as  Christ  walked.  And  the  energetic  severity 
of  his  moral  nature  appears  here  also  in  his  stern  anti- 
thesis of  love  to  hatred,  as  though  there  were  no 
possible  intermediate  between  them.  When  we  consider 
all  that  is  involved  in  the  word  "  brother,"  the  idea  of 
mere  indifference  in  such  a  relationship  becomes  im- 
possible. If  there  be  not  the  essence  of  love,  there  can 
only  be  the  essence  of  hatred.  He,  therefore,  that  pro- 
fesses to  be  in  the  light  and  yet  hates  his  brother  is  in 
the  darkness — belongs  to  the  world  and  not  to  the 
Kingdom  of  Heaven — however  long  he  may  have  called 

»  Rom.  xiii.  12.  2  j^jiji  j  4_9 

b   b    2 


420  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF    CHRISTIA^^ITT. 

himself  a  Christian.  But  he  who  loves  will  never 
cause  another  to  stumble,  can  never  therefore  incur  that 
grievous  sentence  which  Christ  pronounced  on  those  who 
wilfully  lead  others  into  sin.^  The  man  who  hates  his 
brother  has  the  permanent  sphere  of  his  life  in  the 
darkness.  The  light  of  the  body  is  the  eye  ;  and  since 
the  e3'e  of  such  a  man  is  evil,  his  whole  body  is  full  of 
darkness.  He  stumbles  through  life  along  a  road  of 
which  he  does  not  know  the  goal. 

These  two  illustrative  paragraphs  are  closed,  as  is 
the  case  in  the  first  section  of  the  Epistle  (ii.  1,  2),  by 
a  hortatory  conclusion,^  which  falls  into  the  rhythm  so 
natural  to  St.  John — 

"  I  write  to  you,  my  little  children/  because''  your  sins  have  been 
forgiven  you  for  His  name's  sake : 

"  I  write  to  you,  fathers,  because  ye  have  learnt  to  know  Him 
who  is  fi'om  the  beginning  :  * 

"  I  write  to  you,  young  men,  because  ye  have  conquered  the  evil 
one  : 

"  I  wrote ^  to  you,  little  children,^  because  ye  have  learnt  to  know 
the  Father  : 

^  Matt,  xviii.  6.  *  See  analysis,  supra,  p.  396. 

3  Tf Kvla,  addressed  to  all  Christians,  as  in  ver.  1 ;  iii.  18  ;  iv.  4 ;  v.  21 ; 
John  xiii.  33.     It  is  only  foimd  in  St.  John. 

*  That  2tj  here  means  "  because,"  and  not  "  that,"  is  proved  by  ver.  21. 

*  "  Alii  juvenes  corpore,  vos  fide  "  (Bengel). 

*  typa^a  («,  A,  B,  C,  L,  Syriac,  Coptic,  JEthiopic,  Arabic),  not  ypdi<t>co, 
soems  to  be  the  true  reading  in  this  verse.  It  is  very  difficult  to  say  why 
the  tense  is  altered ;  possibly  only  for  emphasis,  like  the  formula  "  we 
decree  and  have  decreed."  The  attempt  to  refer  it  only  to  the  part  of 
the  Epistle  already  written,  while  ypd(pa>  points  to  what  follows,  is  un- 
tenable and  against  usage.  Both  words  refer  to  the  whole  Epistle.  It 
is,  however,  curious  that  up  to  this  point  ypd(pw  has  occurred  seven  times, 
whereas  eypml/a  is  used  six  times  in  the  rest  of  the  letter. 

''  TatSia  seems  to  differ  in  no  sense  from  tckwo.  See  ver.  18  ;  John 
ixi.  5.  Perhaps  the  change  is  merely  for  the  sake  of  literary  form  and 
variety.  Tf Kvla  may  be  a  little  more  personal  and  affectionate,  and  so  be 
represented,  as  Bishop  Wordsworth  saya,  by  "my  little  children." 


A   SIXFOLD   APPEAL.  421 

"  I  "wrote  to  you,  fathers,  because  ye  have  learnt  to  know  Him. 
■who  is  from  the  beginning  : 

"  I  wrote  to  you,  young  men,  because  ye  are  strong,*  and  the 
"Word  of  God  abideth  in  you,  and  ye  have  conquered  the  wicked 
one  "2  (ii.  12— 1 4). 

In  these  words  we  have  a  six-fold  appeal,  of  which 
the  first  three  clauses  are  introduced  by  the  present,  "I 
write,"  and  the  last  three  by  the  aorist,  "  I  wrote." 
This  aorist  might  be  rendered  in  English  by  the  perfect, 
"  I  have  loritteu"  since  it  was  the  tense  used  by  epis- 
tolary idiom,  to  represent  a  letter  regarded  as  a  whole. 
The  first  question  to  be  settled  is  whether  the  Apostle 
has  in  view  three  different  ages  of  life.  If  so,  it  is 
certainly  strange  that  he  should  place  "  fathers "  be- 
tween "  little  children  "  and  "  young  men."  From  his 
use  of  "  little  children  "  in  other  parts  of  the  Epistle,^ 
to  express  the  whole  body  of  Christians,  there  can  be 
little  doubt  that  this  is  his  meaning  here.  If  so,  in  the 
first  of  each  three  clauses  he  is  exhorting  Christians  as 
a  body,  and  in  the  latter  two  he  is  specially  speaking  to 
the  two  classes  into  which  Christians  of  that  day  might 
most  generally  be  divided,  namely,  "  fathers "  and 
"  young  men."  Indeed,  to  address  "  little  children  " 
as  such  would  have  been  alien  to  the  habits  of 
that  age,  nor  would  little  children  have  understood 
the  language  here  addressed  to  them.  He  says  to  the 
Christians  generally  that  their  sins  have  been  forgiven 
them,  because,  as  we  have  had  repeated  occasion  to  see, 
every  address  to  Christians  "  must  presuppose  Chris- 
tianity in   the  hearers,   and  yet  teach  it."     Hence  he 

*  "  Fitque  valens  juvenis  neque  enim  robustior  aetas  Ulla  "  (Ov.  M.e,t. 
XV.  208).     i<rxi/po2  (Luke  xi.  21 ;  Heb.  xi.  34). 

2  In  all  these  appeals  the  strongest  warning  is  involved  in  the  loftiness 
of  the  assumed  ideal.  •*  ii.  1,  28. 


422  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

addresses  the  fathers  of  the  Churches,  whether  in  a 
literal  or  an  ideal  sense,  as  having  attained  to  the  true 
knowledge  of  the  Eternal  Father  ;  and  the  young  men 
as  having  won  a  secure  and  tranquil  mastery  over 
temptation.  After  due  time  the  young  man's  conquest 
will  lead  to  the  father's  knowledge.  The  general 
identity  in  meaning  of  the  second  three  with  the  first 
three  clauses  makes  it  somewhat  difficult  to  account  for 
the  change  of  tense.  Both  phrases,  "  I  write  "  and  "  I 
wrote,"  refer  to  this  letter ;  the  first  as  expressing  the 
writer's  present  purpose,  the  other  mentally  glancing  at 
it  as  a  completed  whole.  The  two  together  give  a 
greater  emphasis  to  his  exhortations,^  and  are,  perhaps, 
meant  by  way  of  introduction  to  the  following  section 
of  the  Epistle  : — 

"  Love  not  the  world,^  nor  yet  the  things  in  the  world.^  If  any 
man  love  the  world,  the  love  of  the  Father  is  not  in  him  ;*  because 
everything  that  is  in  the  world,  the  desire  of  the  flesh,  and  the  desire 
of  the  eyes,*  and  the  braggart  vaixnt  of  life/  is  not  from  the  Father, 

1  "  A  scribo  transit  ad  scripsi :  non  temere  ;  scilicet  verbo  scribcndi  ex 
praesenti  iu  praetei'itum  transposito  immisit  conimonitiouem  formossimam  '' 
(Bengel). 

^  "  God  loved  the  world  "  (John  iii.  16)  with  DiA^ine  compassion,  as  its 
Creator ;  we  are  not  to  love  it  with  base  desire.  We  are  not  to  set  our 
affections  either  on  its  material  seductions,  or  on  those  human  corruptions 
which  mark  its  ruined  condition. 

'  All  kinds  of  sinful  living,  thinking,  and  demeanour  (Ebrard). 
"  Yulgata  consuetudo  homiimm,  res  corporeas  unice  appetentium  " 
(Semler).  *  "  Ccmtraria  non  sunt  simid  "  (Bengel). 

6  "  Desire  "  (^Tri^u^ia)  is  coupled  (always  subjectively,  i.e.,  the  desire  of, 
not /or)  with  "  the  heart"  (Rom.  i.  24),  "the  body"  (Rom.  vi.  12),  and 
"  mankind"  (1  Pet.  iv.  2,  &c.).  Desires  are  called  "  worldly"  (Tit.  ii.  12) 
and  "  tlesldy  "  (1  Pet.  ii.  11).  By  the  "  desire  of  the  flesh  "  is  meaut  every 
form  of  wrong  or  excessive  lust.  By  the  "  desire  of  the  eyes  "  is  meant 
the  sphere  of  selfishness,  envy,  covetousness,  hatred,  and  revenge  (Ebrard). 
Thus  in  the  Testament  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  one  of  the  seven  ''  spirits 
of  deceit,"  is  the  "  spirit  of  seeing,  with  which  desire  is  produced." 

^  Similarly,  while  speaking  of  luxurious  extravagance,  Poljibius  (vi.  5, 


WALKING  IN  THE  LIGHT.  423 

but  is  from  the  world.  And  the  world  is  passing  away,  and  the 
desire  of  it.  But  he  who  doeth  the  will  of  God  abideth  for  ever. 
Little  children,  it  is  the  last  hour,'  and  as  ye  heard  that  Antichrist^ 
is  coming,  even  now  antichrists  in  numbers  have  come  into  being, 
whence  we  recognise  that  it  is  the  last  hour.^  From  us  they  went 
forth,  but  they  were  not  of  us,  for  had  they  been  of  us  they  would 
have  abode  with  us  ;  but  (they  went  out)  in  order  that  they  may  be 
manifested  that  all  are  not  of  us"^  (ii.  15,  19). 

With  this  clause  begins  the  third  section  of  St. 
John's  illustrations  as  to  the  nature  and  meaning  of 
"  walking  in  the  Kght."  As  the  very  name  of  the  Light 
reminds  us  of  the  darkness,  which  is  its  opposite  ;  and 
as  God's  kingdom  is  the  sphere  of  Light,  so  the  world 
is  the  realm  of  darkness.  He,  then,  who  would  walk 
in  the  Light  must  enter  into  the  meaning  of  this  sever- 
ance. He  must  not  love  the  world,  nor  the  things 
which  enter  into  the  ideas  of  the  world.  Those  things 
are  defined  under  their  ethical  aspect.  They  are  the 
objects  of  sensual  desire  in  all  its  forms.  They  are  the 
things  which  tend  to  the  gratification  of  the  flesh — that 
is,   of  our  whole  lower  and  animal  nature — everything 

7)    says — jj   irepl    Tovs    $iovs    d\a(ouela    Ka\    iroKureXeta.      Chrysostom  Calls    it 

"  the  inflation  (rvipos)  and  outward  splendour  {(pavTa(r(a)  of  worldly  Hfe." 
"  Libido  sentiendi,  sciendi,  dominandi  "  (Pascal). 

1  All  Christians  felt  that  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  was  the  close  of  an  aeon. 
It  was  a  coming  of  Christ.  They  all  felt  that  after  that  He  might  finally 
come  to  judgment  at  any  time.  "  Ultimum  tempus,  in  quo  sic  complentur 
omnia  ut  nihil  supersit  praeter  ultimam  Christi  revelatiouem  "  (Calvin ; 
1  Cor.  XV.  22 ;  2  Cor.  v.  1,  sg. ;  1  Thess.  iv.  15,  sq.). 

2  "  Antichrist "  is  a  word  peculiar  to  St.  John  in  the  N.  T.  (ii.  18,  22 ; 
iv.  3 ;  2  Jolm  7).  These  are  the  only  passages  in  which  the  word  occurs. 
Strange  to  say,  it  is  not  once  used  in  the  Apocalypse. 

3  2  Tim.  iii.  1,  sq. 

*  The  oil  iravres  might  mean  "  none,"  as  ov  -n-aa-a  aapi,  means  "  no  flesh  " 
in  Rom.  iii.  20,  but  it  is  simpler  to  explain  the  passage  as  a  mixture  of  two 
constructions,  "  that  they  may  be  manifested  as  not  belonging  to  us,"  and 
"  that  it  may  be  manifested  that  all  [i.e.,  all  who  nominally  belong  to  us^ 
are  not  of  us." 


424  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

which  tends  to  foster  and  stimulate  the  sins  of  gluttony, 
drunkenness,  and  impurity  in  all  their  many  forms  and 
gradations.  They  are  the  things  which  gratify  the 
desire  of  the  eyes — all  that  tends  to  the  sins  of  intel- 
lectual selfishness  and  slothful  sestheticism.^  They  are 
the  braggart  vaunt  of  outward  life — all  that  tends  to 
the  sins  of  vulgar  ostentation,  egotistic  pride,  intel- 
lectual contempt,  which  spring  from  regarding  life,  not 
in  its  divine  and  spiritual  {^(^v),  but  in  its  earthly  and 
external  aspect  (yS/o?)  ."■^  In  St.  John's  language,  therefore, 
the  world  {/cosmos)  does  not  mean  the  physical  universe, 
which  does  indeed  deserve  the  name  of  "  order,"  by 
which  it  is  described,'^  but  the  world  regarded  in  its 
ethical  sense,  that  is,  a  world  disordered  by  the  unre- 
strained prevalence  of  sinful  forces,  the  world  fettered 
in  the  bondage  of  corruption/  He  bids  us  not  to  love 
this  world — to  have  no  esteem  and  affection  for  it — for 
two  reasons.  First,  because  such  love  cannot  proceed 
from  God,  but  from  that  evil  principle  which  is  the 
source  of  all  vain  and  vile  desires  ;  and  next,  because  the 
world  is  but  a  fleeting  show,  and  the  desires  which  it 
inflames  can  have  but  an  instant's  gratification.  On 
the  other  hand,  he  who  makes  the  will  of  God  the 
law  of  all  his  actions,  abides  for  ever.  And  it  is  the 
property  of  love  to  bind  us  closely  to  that  which  we 
love ;  if  we  love  the  earth  we  are  earthly ;  the  love  of 
God  makes  us  divine.^ 

1  Matt.  vi.  22. 

'  fiios,  mere  "  li\aug" — the  psychic,  animal,  sensuous  life,  as  in  iii.  17. 
tV  (xapKl  fiiuirai,  1  Pet.  iv.  2. 

^  "  Quem  K6ffn.ov  Graeci  nomine  oruamenti  appellavemut  "  (Plin.  H.  N. 
ii.  3).  *  Rom.  viii.  19,  20. 

'•>  "  Amor  habot  \\xn.  uuiendi ;  si  terram  amas  terreuus  es,  si  Deum 
diviuus"  (Gersou). 


ANTICHRISTS.  425 

Then  from  the  general  warning  against  the  world  he 
descends  to  its  special  manifestation  in  the  form  of  anti- 
Christian  error,  which  he  introduces  with  the  address  of 
fatherly  tenderness,  "  Little  children,  it  is  the  last  hour." 
The  world  and  its  desire  is  passing  away  now,  it  has 
not  long  to  last.  The  final  dispensation  has  begun. 
There  will  not  be,  there  cannot  be,  any  new  dispensa- 
tion. How  long  this  seon  is  to  last  neither  St.  John 
knew  nor  any  man,  not  even  the  angels  in  heaven. 
With  reference  to  all  previous  seons  this  is  the  final 
seon.  At  its  close  there  will  be  the  new  heaven  and 
the  new  earth.  And  potentially  this  seon  is  already 
complete.  With  the  manifestation  of  the  Word  in 
flesh  its  whole  development  was  condensed  into  its  first 
moment.  It  may  linger  on  for  a  thousand  years,  for 
a  thousand  years  is  with  the  Lord  as  one  day ;  but  "it  has 
already  advanced  to  the  top  of  its  development,  and 
therefore  hastens  to  its  end."  And  one  sign  of  that 
ever-approaching  end — ever  approaching  however  long 
delayed — is  the  existence  already  of  many  Antichrists. 
Whether  the  many  were  yet  to  be  concentrated  into 
one  monstrous  development  of  intense  personal  wicked- 
ness, St.  John  does  not  say.  The  word  Antichrist, 
which  St.  John  alone  uses,  may  mean  either  "  rivals 
of  Christ" — i.e.,  pseudo-Christs  (Matt.  xxiv.  5,  11),  or 
*' enemies  oi  Christ;"^ — either  those  who  try  to  pass 
themselves  off"  as  Christs,  or  those  who  set  themselves  in 
open  array  against  him.  An  Antichrist  may  take  the 
semblance  of  a  Nero  or  of  a  Simon  Magus,  of  a  Priest  or 

*  The  preposition  dj/rl  is  used  in  both  senses  in  compounds — either  (1) 
"instead  of"  or  (2)  "opposed  to."  Thus  we  have  (1)  avTi^atriXivs,  "a 
viceroy ;  "  avriOeos,  "  a  demi-god ;  "  avdiiraros,  "  a  proconsul,"  &c. ;  and  (2) 
avri<pi\6ao(pos,  "  an  enemy  to  philosophers ;  "  dvTifiaxv'r'hs,  "  an  opponent ;  " 


426  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

of  a  Voltaire.  St.  John  enters  into  no  details  because 
liis  readers  had  already  heard  that  Antichrist  cometh. 
This  must  refer  to  his  own  oral  teachings,  or  those 
of  other  Apostles,  for  he  tells  us  afterwards  that  by 
"  Antichrists  "  he  means  those  who  deny  the  Incarna- 
tion (iv.  3),  or  who  deny  the  Father  and  the  Sou 
(ii.  22).  This  form  of  Antichrist  is  not  described 
either  by  Daniel,  or  by  St.  Paul  in  his  Man  of  Sin. 
If,  in  2  Thess.  3,  4,  the  expression  of  St.  Paul  may 
admit  of  some  sort  of  analogous  interpretation,  it 
certainly  could  not  have  been  assumed  b}^  St.  John  that 
the  brief  letter  to  a  Macedonian  Church  would  already 
have  pervaded  the  whole  of  Asia.^ 

Nevertheless,  the  prevalence  of  these  Antichrists, 
of  whom  St.  John  had  orally  spoken,  was  the  direct 
fulfilment  of  the  weeping  jDrophesy  of  St.  Paul,  in  his 
farewell  to  the  Ephesian  Elders,  "  that  after  his  depar- 
ture grievous  wolves  would  enter  among  them,  not 
sparing  the  flock,  and  that  from  among  their  own  selves 
men  would  arise,  speaking  perverted  things  to  drag  away 
disciples  after  them."  The  very  danger  to  the  Church 
lay  in  the  fact  that  this  anti-Christian  teaching  arose 
out  of  her  own  bosom.  The  Antichrists  did  not  openly 
apostatise  from  the  Christian  body ;  they  corrupted 
it  from  within.  They  still  called  themselves  Christians  ; 
had  they  really  been  so,  they  would  have  continued  to  be 
so.     But  their  present  apostasy  was  a  manifestation  of 

avTiKaraiv,  a  book  "  against  Cato."  Had  St.  John  meant  "  a  rival  of 
Christ,"  he  would  have  used  pseudochristos,  as  he  uses  pseudo-prophetes. 
The  Fathers,  both  Greek  and  Latin,  understood  the  word  normally  to 
mean  "  contrarius  Christo  "  (Aug. ), "  Christi  robelles  "  (Tert.).  See  Trench, 
Synonyms  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  145.  See  Kurd's  Sermons  on  Pro- 
phecies respecting  Antichrist,  and  Prejudices  against  the  Doctrine. 
'  Acts  xxi.  29,  30. 


THE   SPIRIT'S  UNCTION.  427 

the  fact  that  they  never  had  been  true  Christians,  and 
that  not  all  who  called  themselves  Christians  are  such 
in  reality. 

But  if  there  be  these  dangers  from  within  —  if 
the  Christianity  of  the  lips  is  consistent  with  anti- 
Christianity  of  life — if  walking"  in  the  light  is  never- 
theless wholly  incompatible  with  any  fellowship  with 
the  world,  as  manifested  in  this  or  any  other  form 
of  anti-Christianity  —  how  is  the  Christian  to  be 
secured  ?  That  is  the  question  which,  in  the  next 
section,  St.  John  proceeds  to  answer. 

"But  ye  have  an  unction  from  the  Holy  One,  and  ye  know  all 
things.^  He  that  confesseth  the  Son  hath  also  the  Father.  I  have 
not  written  unto  ye  because  ye  know  not  the  truth,  but  because  ye 
know  it,  and  because  no  lie  is  of  the  truth.  Who  is  the  liar  but  he 
that  denieth  Jesus  is  the  Christ  %  This  is  the  Antichrist ;  even  he 
that  denieth  the  Father  and  the  Son ;  whosoever  denieth  the  Son 
the  same  hath  not  the  Father ;  he  that  confesseth  the  Son  hath  the 
Father  also.  Ye — what  ye  heard  from  the  beginning,  let  it  abide 
in  you.  If  that  abide  in  you  which  ye  heard  from  the  beginning, 
ye  also  shall  abide  in  the  Son  and  in  the  Father.  And  this  is  the 
promise  which  he  promises  to  us — Eternal  Life. 

"  These  things  wrote  I  to  you  concerning  those  who  mislead  you. 
And  ye — the  unction^  which  ye  received  from  Him,  abideth  in  you, 
and  ye  have  not  need  that  any  man  teach  you,  but  as  the  unction 
itself  teacheth  you  concerning  all  things,^  and  is  a  true  thing  and 
not  a  lie ;  and  even  as  it  taught  you,  abide  in  it "  (ii.  20 — 27). 

Here  then  is  the  Christian's  security — an  unction 
from  the  Holy  Spirit,  an  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit 

^  "  Si  Christum  bene  scis,  satis  est  si  caetera  nescis ; 
Si  Christum  nescis,  nihil  est,  si  caetera  discis." 

Motto  of  Johann  Bugenhagen. 

*  The  word  chrisma,  not  used  in  the  Gospel,  may  be  suggested  by  the 
word  antichristos.  All  Christians  are  christoi,  "  anointed  of  God." 
Comp.  Acts  X.  38,  "  God  anointed  Him  with  the  Holy  Spirit." 

^  That  is  all  things  essential ;  all  that  wo  need. 


428  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIAKETY. 

by  wliicli  we  are  anointed  to  be  Kings,  and  Priests,  and 
Prophets,^  even  as  Prophets,^  Priests,  and  Kings  were 
anointed  of  old.  We  are  anointed  by  the  same  cbrism 
as  was  Christ  himself,  and  therefore  can  discern  between 
Christ  and  Antichrist.  This  was  the  Lord's  promise 
that  His  Holy  Spirit  should  lead  us  into  all  truth,  and 
therefore  separate  us,  by  His  consecration,  from  the  re- 
gion of  darkness,  from  the  world,  its  errors  and  its  lusts. 
And  this  is  why  St.  John  need  not  dwell  on  a  multi- 
tude of  particulars,  or  track  the  various  ramifications 
of  deceit.  For  he  is  not  writing  to  Jews  or  to  Gentiles, 
but  to  Christian  men,  whom  he  needs  only  to  remind 
that  they  belong  to  the  sphere,  not  of  lying  semblances 
but  of  the  Eternal  and  the  Eeal.  They  are  alread}'- 
"  in  the  light ; "  he  does  but  need  to  remind  them 
to  abide  therein.  Now,  for  a  Christian  to  deny  that 
Jesus  is  the  Christ,  stamps  him  as  radically  untrue. 
He  must  have  ceased  to  be  "  in  Christ "  by  that  denial ; 
he  must  have  left  the  kingdom  of  heaven  for  the  world, 
the  light  for  the  darkness,  the  Eeal  for  the  illusory. 
And  to  deny  the  Son  is  to  deny  the  Father,  since  only 
by  the  Son  has  the  Father  been  made  known.  These 
stern,  disconnected  sentences,  falling  like  hammer 
strokes  on  the  heart  of  the  listener,  mark  that  holy  and 
uncompromising  severity  of  St.  John's  ideal,  which 
resulted  from  his  living  in  the  atmosphere  of  contempla- 
tion, and  regarding  all  things  in  their  inmost  nature 
and  essence.  Yet  we  should  judge,  from  the  affectionate 
title  of  "  little  childi-en  "  by  which  they  are  introduced, 
and   we    know   from    the    precious   traditions   of    the 

^  Is.  Ixi.  1.     Kings  and  priests,  Rev.  i.  6 ;  "a  royal  priestliood,  a  holy 
nation,"  1  Pot.  ii.  9 ;  prophets,  Joel  ii.  28 ;  Acts  ii.  17,  18. 
2  1  Kings  xix.  16  only. 


ETERNAL  LIFE.  429 

Apostle's  later  days,  that  this  stern  theological  in- 
flexibility cannot  be  perverted,  as  it  so  often  has  been, 
into  an  excuse  for  theological  hatred  and  party  spirit, 
since  it  was  combined  with  the  tenderest  charity  towards 
erring  souls. 

But  to  save  them  from  all  this  terrible  defection, 
they  had  but  to  abide  in  the  truth  which  they  heard 
from  the  first,  and  to  suffer  it  to  abide  in  them.  The 
exhortation  resembles  that  of  our  Lord  in  the  Grospel, 
"  Abide  in  Me  and  I  in  you.^  If  ye  abide  in  Me,  and 
My  words  abide  in  you,  ye  shall  ask  for  yourselves  what- 
ever ye  will  and  it  shall  be  granted  to  you."  Their 
active  endeavours  after  constancy  would  be  followed 
by  a  passive  growth  in  grace.  The  abiding  is  secured 
by  the  constancy.  The  constancy  is  secured  by  the 
abiding.  "  It  is  a  permanent  and  continuous  recipro- 
cation ;  the  abiding  of  Christ  in  men  furthers  their 
abiding  in  Him ;  this  again  facihtates  the  former  ;  and 
so  it  goes  on." 

This  abiding  is  what  He  promised  to  us,  and  it  is 
Eternal  Life.  For  Eternal  Life  is  fellowship  with  the 
Father  and  the  Son.  "  This  is  Life  Eternal,  that  they 
should  learn  to  know  Thee  the  Only  the  Yer}'-  God,  and 
Him  whom  Thou  sendest,  Jesus  Christ."^ 

Then,  in  the  last  two  verses  (26,  27),  comes  the  reca- 
pitulation and  closing  exhortation,  before  he  passes  to  a 
new  topic.  "  You  have  heard  your  danger.  You  are 
aware  of  that  Unction  which  will  secure  you  against 
it.  I  have  told  you  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  Eternal 
Life,  and  of  the  fellowship  on  which  I  touched  at  the 
beginning  of  my  letter.     Abide  in  the  Unction.     It  is  a 

1  John  XV.  4,  5,  7. 
*  John  xvii.  2,  3. 


430  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

thin<^   absolutely  real,  incommunicably  dissevered  from 

all  that  is  false.     Thus  it  is  a  source  of  all  true  teaching 

to  you.     That  is  the  one  command  which  is  needful  for 

it 
you. 

SECTION    II. 

THE    CONFIDENCE    OF    SONSHIP. 

Having  thus  shown  at  length  that  fellowship  with 
God  involves  a  walk  in  the  Light,  and  a  confession 
of  sin,  and  that  our  fellowship  with  the  brethren  con- 
sists in  general  obedience  to  the  commands  of  Grod, 
and  special  imitation  of  Christ  in  His  love  for  all ;  and 
having  shown  that  this  common  fellowship  with  God 
and  with  our  brethren  necessitates  an  absolute  severance 
from  the  world  in  general,  and  from  all  antichristian 
teaching  in  particular,  he  enters  on  another  topic — 
namely,  on  the  confidence  inspired  hy  Sonship  as  a  sign  of 
our  possession  of  Eternal  Life. 

"  And  now  little  children  abide  in  Him,  that  if  He  be  manifested 
we  may  have  confidence,  and  may  not  be  shamed  away  from  Him  in 
His  appearing.^  If  ye  know  that  He  is  righteous,  ye  recognise  that 
every  one  also  who  doeth  righteousness  has  been  born  of  Him. 

"  See  what  love  the  Father  hath  given  to  us^  that  we  should  be 
called  children  of  God.^  [And  such  we  are.*]  For  this  cause  the 
world  recogniseth  not  us,  because  it  did  not  recognise  Him.    Beloved, 

'  "  Ne   pudefiamus   ab   ejus   praesentia "    (Calviu).      Matt.    xxv.   41. 

iropfVfcrdi   air    ffiov. 

2  r]f^7i/,  "  indiguis,  iuimicis,  peccatoribus"  (Com.  a  Lapide). 

^  The  missionary  Ziegebalg  tells  an  interesting  story  that  in  trans- 
lating this  passage  with  the  aid  of  a  Hindoo  youth,  the  youth  rendered  it, 
"  that  we  should  be  allowed  to  hiss  His  feet."  When  asked  why  he  thus 
diverged  from  the  text,  he  replied,  "A  Child!  that  is  too  much — too 
high!"  (Brauue,  ad  loc). 

*  These  words  are  found  in  «,  A,  B,  C,  Theophylact  [ytveffdai  re  koI 
Koyta-erii'at),  Augustine,  &c.  They  are  omitted  in  K,  L,  and  by  (Ecuniouius. 
They  may  be  genuine,  but  read  like  an  awkward  gloss.  The  Vulg.  renders 
it  wrongly  "  et  simus." 


THE   MANIFESTATION   OF   CHRIST.  431 

now  we  are  childi-en  of  God,  and  not  yet  is  it  manifested  what  we 
shall  be.  We  know  that  if  He  be  manifested  we  shall  be  like  Him,  be- 
cause we  shall  see  Him  even  as  He  is.  And  every  one  who  hath  this 
hope  in  Him,  purifieth  himself  even  as  He  is  pure  "  '  (ii.  28 — iii.  3). 

The  "  and  now,"  and  the  address,  "  little  children," 
of  ii.  28,  together  with  the  introduction  of  the  four  new 
thoughts — of  Christ's  "  manifestation,"  of  our  having 
"  confidence,"  of  "  doing  righteousness,"  and  of  having 
been  "  born  of  God  " — all  indicate  the  beginning  of  a 
new  section.  And  every  one  of  these  new  thoughts  is 
referred  to  and  developed  in  the  next  great  division  of 
the  Epistle.' 

i.  As  regards  the  ''manifestation'  of  Christ,  that  term, 
as  expressive  of  His  return  to  judgment,  is  peculiar  to 
St.  John,  and  marks  his  invariable  point  of  view  that  all 
things  in  the  Divine  economy  advance,  not  by  sudden 
catastrophes,  but  by  germinant  developments  in  accord- 
ance with  eternal  laws.  Christ  is  present  now;  His 
return  will  be  but  a  manifestation  of  His  Presence  ;  and 
it  is,  perhaps,  the  consciousness  that  Christ  is  always 
present  which  has  prevented  St.  John  from  elsewhere 
using  the  word  Parousia  for  His  second  return,  though 
that  term  is  so  common  in  the  other  sacred  writers. 
Only  by  abiding  in  God  can  we  meet  that  manifested 

^  Comp.  2  Cor.  vii.  I.  The  Apostles  do  not  deem  it  necessary  at 
every  turn  to  introduce  all  the  qualifications  which  would  express  the 
whole  truth  as  to  the  Divine  and  human  elements  in  the  work  of  salva- 
tion; but  of  course  the  "purifieth  himself"  must  be  understood  side  by 
side  with  John  xv.  5,  "  without  Me  ye  can  do  nothing."  "  Castificas  te, 
nou  de  te,  sed  de  illo  qui  veuit  ut  iuhabitet  te  "  (Aug.).  There  seems  to 
be  no  fundamental  distinction  between  the  uses  of  ayviCo)  and  KaQapi^u. 
The  adjectives  ayvhsy  Kadaphs  are  used  indifferently  for  "linp  iu  the  LXX. 
both  of  material  (Num.  viii.  21,  &c.)  and  spiritual  things  (Ps.  xi.  7,  &c.). 

■^  "  Manifestation  of  Christ  "  (iii.  3 — -8) ;  "  Confidence  "  (iii.  21 ;  iv.  17 ; 
V.  14) ;  "  Doing  righteousness  "  (iii.  1 — 10) ;  beiug  "  born  of  God  "  (iii. 
24,  seq.). 


432  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Presence  without  sliame,  and  answer  wntli  confidence  at 
His  judgment  seat.  Now,  as  St.  John  has  already  said 
that  "  every  one  who  abideth  in  Him  sinneth  not,"  so 
now  he  expresses  the  same  thought  in  a  more  developed 
form,  by  saying  that  the  doing  righteousness — as  He 
is  righteous — is  the  test  of  having  been  born  of  Him. 
He  who  does  not  sin  has  fellowship  with  God.  He 
whose  innocence  is  manifested  in  righteousness  may  know 
with  confidence  that  he  has  been  born  of  Grod.  Here 
the  Evangelist's  point  of  view  nearly  resembles  that  of 
St.  Paul,  when  he  says  that  "  the  foundation  of  God 
standeth  sure,  having  this  seal, — '  The  Lord  knoweth 
them  that  are  His,'  and  '  Let  every  one  that  nameth 
the  name  of  Christ  depart  from  iniquity.'  "  ^ 

The  righteous  man,  then,  is  the  son  of  God  ;  and 
what  love  has  the  Father  given  us  with  this  very  object — 
that  we  may  be  called  His  children !  St.  John  does  not 
call  us  "sons"  of  God,  as  St.  Paul  does,^  but  "children," 
because  he  regards  the  sonship  less  as  adoptive  and 
more  as  natural.  If  the  world  does  not  recognise  the 
sonship  we  are  not  to  be  surprised,  since  neither  did  it 
recognise  the  Sonship  of  Him  from  whom  our  sonship 
is  derived.  But  there  is  another  reason  why  St.  John 
calls  us  "  children  "  rather  than  "sons."  It  is  because 
the  word  "  childhood  "  involves  in  it  the  necessary  idea 
of  future  growth,  and  this  is  true  of  our  relation  to  God. 
Children  we  are,  and  something  more  than  this  we  shall 

1  2  Tim.  ii.  19. 

*  "  According  to  St.  Paul  we  receive  for  Christ's  sake  the  rights  of 
children.  According  to  St.  John  vre  receive  throngh  Christ  the  children's 
nature.  According  to  St.  Paul  the  old  nature  of  man  is  transformed  into 
a  new.  According  to  St.  John  an  altogether  new  principle  of  nature 
takes  the  place  of  the  former.  It  is  most  e%'ident  that  the  two  views  are 
substantially  one,  and  true,  but  they  depend  on  the  respective  general 
systems  of  the  two  Apostles  "  (Haupt,  p.  156). 


TEST   OF   SONSHIP.  433 

be  hereafter,  because  we  shall  see  God,  and,  therefore, 
become  more  and  more  like  Him,  though  that  new,  and 
as  yet  unknown,  relationship  to  Him  will  be  but  the 
full  evolution  of  the  old.  And  it  is  the  constant  aim  of 
every  one  who  really  holds  this  hope  to  begin  that  ever- 
increasing  resemblance,  by  even  now  purifying  himself 
even  as  Christ  is  pure. 

Our  sonship  of  God  is,  therefore,  tested  at  the  Last 
Day  by  our  lives  ;  and  to  us  it  can  only  become  a 
matter  of  present  assurance  by  doing  righteousness.  He 
proceeds  to  illustrate  this  truth  in  four  sentences,  of  which 
each  consists  of  two  clauses.  First,  he  shows  that  sin  is 
opposed  to  God  and  opposed  to  Christ  (vs.  4,  5) ;  then 
that  to  abide  in  Him  is  to  be  sinless,  and  that  to  be 
sinful  is  never  to  have  seen  Him  (v.  6)  ;  nay  more, 
he  shows  that  to  do  righteousness  is  to  be  of  God, 
and  to  do  sin  is  to  be  of  the  devil  (vs.  7,  8);  then,  in 
the  last  two  verses  of  the  clause  (9,  10),  he  recapitulates 
the  proof,  and  states  the  final  result. 

The  section  then  is  as  follows  : — 

"  Every  one  that  committeth  sin  committeth  also  lawlessness,  and 
sin  is  lawlessness.  And  ye  know  that  He  was  manifested  that  He 
may  take  away  sins,'  and  sin  is  not  in  Him  "  (iii.  4,  5). 

"  Every  one  who  abideth  in  Him  sinneth  not.  Every  one  who 
sinneth  hath  not  seen  Him  nor  even  known  Him"^  (ver.  6). 

"  Little  children,  let  no  one  mislead  you.     He  that  doeth  right- 

^  "Tollit  peccata  et  dimittendo  quae  facta  siiut,  et  adjuvando  ue  fiaut, 
et  perduceudo  ad  vitam  ubi  fieri  omuino  uou  possunt "  (Bede). 

'  "  In  ipso  peccati  momeuto  talis  fit,  ac  si  Eum  nullo  viderit  modo  " 
(Bengel).  This  verse,  as  Theophylact  tells  us,  was  regarded  by  Auti- 
uomiau  Gnostics  as  proving  the  iudefectibility  of  grace,  aud  so  was  turned 
into  an  excuse  for  lasci\'iousuess.  But  that  certain  practical  modifications 
must  be  admitted  is  clear,  from  previous  passages  in  the  Epistle  itself. 
Tlie  older  expositors  generally  adopted  the  method  of  toning  down  the 
Apostle's  language.     Modern  expositors  accept  the  language  as  meaning 

C   C 


434  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

eousness  is  righteous,  as  lie  is  righteous.  He  that  doeth  sin  is  of  the 
devil,'  because  the  devil  sinncth  from  the  beginning.'^    For  this  pur- 

what  it  says,  but  regard  it  as  applying  only  to  the  ideal.  The  two  methods 
come  to  much  the  same  thing  in  the  end.  Thus,  in  verse  9,  some  explain 
"  he  cannot  sin,"  by — 

He  cannot  commit  mortal  sin  (Romanists). 
He  cannot  sin  deliberately  and  intentionally  (Ebrard). 
He  cannot  sin  in  the  way  of  hating  his  brother  (Augustine,  Bode). 
It  is  alien  from  his  nature  to  sin  (Grotius). 
His  nature  and  habit  resist  sin  (Paulus). 

He  does  not  wish  to  sin,  or  ought  not  to  sin  (various  Commentators). 
He  cannot  be  a  sinner  (afiaprdveLv)  (Wordsworth,  and  so  Didymus). 
He  does  not  sin,  he  only  suffers  sin  (Besser ;  comp.  Rom.  vii.  17). 
So  far  as  he  remains  true  to  himself,  he  does  not  sin  (Augustine). 
So  long  as  he  is  a  child  of  God  he  cannot  sin  (others). 
The  only  possible  escape  from  some  such  modification,  is  by  asserting  the 
possibility  of  sinlessness  in  this  life  (which  contradicts  i.  8),  or  else  by 
asserting  that  none  of  us  have  seen  God,  and  none  of  us  are  children  of 
God  (which  contradicts  the  whole  Epistle).     Hopkins  says,   "  The  inter- 
pretation which  I  judge  to  be  most  natural  and  unforced  is  this  :  He  that 
is  born  of  God  doth  not  commit  sin — that  is,  he  doth  not  sin  in  that 
malignant  manner  in  which  the  children  of  the  devil  do ;  he  doth  not 
make  a  trade  of  sin,  nor  live  in  the  constant  and  allowed  practice  of  it.  .  .  . 
There  is  a  great  difference  between  regenerate  and  uuregenerate  persons 
in  the  very  sins  that  they  commit.     '  Their  spot  is  not  the  spot  of  his 
children  '  (Deut.  xxxii.  5).     And  as  they  differ  in  the  committing  of  sin, 
so  much  more  in  the  opposing  of  it."     And  if  the  Stoic  was  allowed  to 
set  before  himself  his  ideal,  why  may  not  the  Christian  do  the  same  ? 
Seneca  said  that  the  wise  man  was  not  only  able  to  do  right,  but  even 
could  not  do  otherwise.     "  Vir  bonus  non  potest  non  facere  quod  facit ; 
in  omni  actu  par  sibi,jam,  non  consilio  bonus,  sed  more  eo  perductus ;  ut 
non  tantum  recte  facere  possit,  sed  nisi  recte  facere  non  possit.'^     And 
Yelleius  Paterculus  said  of  the  younger  Cato,  "  Homo  vii-tuti  simillimus, 
et  per  omnia  ingenio  Diis  quam  hominibus  propior,  qui  nunquam  recte 
fecit  ut  facere  -s-ideretur,  sed  quia  aliter  facere  non  poterat  "  {Hist.  ii.  34) ; 
and  he  spoke  of  him  as  "  exempt  from  all  human  vices."     And  Tacitus 
said  that  when  Nero  wished  to  kill  Paetus  Thrasea,  it  was  as  if  he  wished 
"  to  Idll  virtue  herself.''     The  Christian  ideal  is  infinitely  higher  than 
the  Stoic,  and  that  is  why  the  Christian  knows  that  not  even  a  saint  can 
be  absolutely  sinless;  yet  he  hates  sin,  and   more  and  more  wins  the 
victory  over  it. 

'  He  does  not  say,  "  born  of  the  devil."  "  Neminem  fecit  diabolus, 
neminem  geuuit  neminem  creavit"  (Aug.).  His  work  is  "corruptio  non 
generatio  "  (Bengol). 

*  Not  "  ex  quo  diabolus  est  diabolus  "  (Bengel),  but  since  sin  began  : 
"  ab  initio    ov  poccaro." 


SINFULNESS   OF  SIN.  435 

pose  was  the  Son  of  God  manifested  that  He  may  destroy  the  works 
of  the  devil  "  (ver.  7,  8). 

"  Every  one  that  hath  been  born  of  God  doth  not  commit  sin, 
because  His  seed  abideth  in  him ;  and  he  cannot  sin,  because  He 
Las  been  born  of  God  "  (ver.  9). 

"  In  this  are  manifest  the  children  of  God  and  the  children  of  the 
devil "  (ver.  10a). 

To  careless  and  superficial  readers  many  of  these 
clauses  might  look  like  mere  mysticism  clothed  in 
antithetic  tautologies.  To  one  who  has  tried  to  study 
the  mind  and  manner  of  St.  John,  they  are  full  of 
the  deepest  meaning.  Take  the  very  first  clause. 
How  deep  and  awful  a  conception  of  sin  ought  we  to 
derive  from  the  fact  that  all  sin,  however  slight  it  may 
seem  to  us,  is  not  a  matter  of  indifference,  but  a  trans- 
gression of  the  divine  law !  How  does  such  a  concep- 
tion tend  to  silence  our  petty  excuses,  or  our  weak 
talk  about  pardonable  human  imperfections  !  How 
different  will  be  our  tone — how  little  shall  we  be  in- 
clined "  to  say  before  the  angel  '  It  was  an  error '  " — 
when  once  we  have  realised  this  "universal  and  ex- 
ceptionless fact !  "  And  still  more  when  we  remember 
that  not  only  is  every  sin,  in  God's  sight,  the  violation 
of  the  eternal  law,  but  also  a  violation  of  the  whole 
purpose  of  Christ's  manifestation  which  was  expressly 
meant  to  take  all  sins  away.  And  when  St.  John 
proceeds  to  say  that  he  who  sinneth  hath  never  seen 
or  known  Grod,  however  much  we  may  be  inclined  to 
introduce  limitations  into  this  language,  both  by  the 
daily  facts  of  Christian  experience,  and  the  recognition 
in  this  very  Epistle  that  even  the  most  advanced  be- 
liever does  not  here  attain  to  absolute  sinlessness 
(i.  8 — 10),  yet  the  awfulness  of  the  stern,  unbending 
language  tends  to  convince  us,  more  than  anything 
c  c  2 


436  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

else  could,  of  the  exceeding  sinfulness  of  sin,  seeing 
that  every  act  of  it  is  a  proof,  as  far  as  it  goes,  of 
alienation  from  God ;  of  affiliation,  in  some  sense,  to 
him  from  whom  all  sin  began.  It  is  a  nullifying  of  all 
that  Christ  died  to  achieve.  The  summing  up,  then, 
of  what  he  has  said,  is  that  in  every  one  who  has  been 
born  of  God  there  is  a  principle  of  divine  life  which 
renders  sin  impossible.  Sin,  on  the  other  hand,  shows, 
by  ethical  likeness,  its  Satanic  parentage.  St.  John 
divides  all  men  simply  into  children  of  God  and  children 
of  the  devil,  and  recognises  no  intermediate  classes. 
We  do  not  see  it  to  be  so  in  the  ordinary  mixture  and 
confusion  of  human  life,  but  in  the  abstract  and  in  the 
essence  of  things,  so  it  is.  To  God,  though  not  to 
men,  it  is  possible  to  write  the  epita^^h  of  each  life 
in  the  brief  words,  "  He  did  that  which  was  good," 
or  "  he  did  that  which  was  evil "  in  the  sight  of  the 
Lord. 

On  the  dread  severity  of  this  language,  on  the 
only  possible  explanation  and  alleviation  of  it,  I  have 
already  dwelt. ^  The  ideal  truth  must  ever,  so  to  speak, 
float  above  its  actual  realisation.  But  the  warning 
force  of  St.  John's  high  words  lies  in  this: — We  are 
children  of  God  by  birth  and  by  gift,  but  unless  we 
also  approve  ourselves  as  His  children  by  act  and  life, 
we  sink  out  of  that  sonship  into  Satanic  depths.  Every 
sin  we  commit  is  a  proof  that  we  are  not  yet  children 
of  light,  children  of  God  ;  but  that  darkness  still  has 
power  over  us.  For  each  such  defection  we  must  find 
forgiveness,  and  against  each  such  defection  we  must 
strive  more  and  more.  A  child  of  God,  as  Luther 
says,  may  receive  daily  wounds  in  the   conflict,  but  he 

^  See  svprn,  pp.  387 — 390. 


DEMONSTRATION  OF  SONSHIP.  437 

never  throws  away  his  arms.  If  once  we  have  fully 
and  freely  dedicated  ourselves  to  God,  sin  may  some- 
times invade  us,  but  it  can  never  have  dominion  over 
us.  Of  the  two  seals  on  the  one  foundation — "  God's 
knowledge  of  us  as  His  own,"  and  "  Departure  from 
iniquity " — where  the  one  is  found,  the  other  w^ill 
be  never  wanting. 

The  demonstration  of  sonship,  then,  in  relation  to 
God,  is  "  to  do  righteousness  "  ;  and  in  relation  to  man 
this  righteousness  is  manifested  by  loving  our  brethren, 
which  he  illustrates  first  negatively  (10^ — 15)  and 
then  positively  (16 — 18). 

"  Every  one  who  cloeth  not  righteousness  is  not  from  God,  nor  he 
who  loveth  not  his  brother.  Because  this  is  the  message  (dyyexla, 
A,  B,  &c.,)  which  ye  heard  from  the  beginning,  in  order  that  (W) 
we  should  love  one  another  :  not  as  Cain  was  from  the  wicked  one,' 
and  brutally  slew  his  brother.  And  why  did  he  brutally  slay  him  1 
Because  his  deeds  were  evil,  but  those  of  his  brother  righteous. 
Wonder  not,  brethren,  if  the  world  hates  you.  We  know  that  we 
have  passed  from  death  unto  life,  because  we  love  the  brethren.^  He 
who  loveth  not  abideth  in  death.  Every  one  who  hateth  his  brother 
is  a  murderer,^  and  ye  know  that  no  murderer  hath  eternal  life 
abiding  in  him"  (iii.  lOfe — 15). 

Our  duty  to  man  follows  as  an  immediate  corol- 
lary from  our  duty  to  God,  just  as  the  second  table  of 
the  Decalogue  follows  naturally  as  an  inference  from 
the  first.  No  doubt  in  thus  exhorting  to  brotherly 
love,  St.  John  is  thinking  in  the  first  place  of  the 
Churches  which    he    is    addressing,    and    therefore  by 

^  I.e.,  "  Let  us  not  be  of  the  wicked  one  as  Cain  was,  who,"  &c.  The 
construction  is  condensed,  as  in  1  Cor.  x.  8.  Some  of  the  Rabbis  said  that 
"  Cain  was  a  son  of  Eve  and  the  Serpent  "  (Zohar). 

2  "  Bona  opera  non  praecedunt  justiticandum  sed  seqnmitur  justifi- 
catum  "  (Au^.V 

^  Comp.  Seneca's  "  Latro  es  autequam  iuquincs  manum." 


438  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

"  brother "  lie  primarily  means  Christian.  But  to 
confine  his  meaning  to  Christian  brethren  would  be 
to  wrong  the  majesty  of  his  teaching.  It  would 
also  dwarf  all  that  our  Lord  taught  on  the  same 
subject — as,  for  instance,  in  the  parable  of  the  Good 
Samaritan;  and  the  force  of  Christ's  own  example 
who  loved  us  and  died  for  us  while  we  were  yet 
sinners.  And  to  miss  the  truth  that  love  is  the  very 
central  command  of  Christianity — though  that  truth 
has  been  missed  for  centuries — though  Church  parties 
in  their  narrow  and  envenomed  controversies  daily 
prove  how  utterly  they  have  missed  it — though  all 
kinds  of  glozing  self-deceptions  are  practised  to  persuade 
the  conscience  that  violations  of  it  are  not  violations  of 
it,  but  are  "uncompromising  faithfulness"  and  "burning 
zeal " — yet  to  miss  that  truth  is  inexcusable,  for  it  was 
delivered  from  the  first,  and  is  repeated  continually. 
It  was,  as  the  Apostle  tells  us,  at  once  the  matter  ("  this 
is  the  message")  and  the  purpose  ("in  order  that  ye 
may  love  one  another  ")  of  the  Christian  revelation. 

In  his  usual  manner  of  illustrating  by  opposites,  St. 
John  impresses  the  duty  by  showing  the  frightfulness 
of  hatred,  of  which  he  selects  Cain  as  an  example, 
because  it  is  the  earliest  and  one  of  the  worst.  The 
word  which  he  uses  for  the  murder — {ea^a^ev,  "  he 
butchered ") — perhaps  refers  to  some  Jewish  legend 
as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  murder  had  been  ac- 
complished. The  instance  was  peculiarly  apposite, 
because  the  murder  was  but  the  ripened  fruit  of  a 
secret  envy  caused  by  God's  approval  of  good  works 
in  another.  It  was,  therefore,  well  adapted  to  show 
the  nature  of  the  ivorld's  hatred  to  the  Church,  and  to 
illustrate  the  fact  that  hatred  belongs  to  the  world — 


HATRED   IS  DEATH.  439 

that  is,  to  tlie  realm  of  Satan  and  of  darkness — and 
should  therefore  be  utterly  excluded  from  the  King- 
dom of  Light  and  of  Christ,  Let  not  the  Church 
be  as  Cain-like  as  the  world.  For  hatred  means  death, 
and  we  have  passed  from  death  into  life,  as  our  love 
to  the  brethren  shows. ^  On  the  other  hand,  if — though 
we  call  ourselves  Christians — we  still  hate,  we  are 
still  in  death.  For  all  hatred  is  potential  murder ; 
it  is  murder  in  the  undeveloped  germ ;  and  it  is  im- 
possible to  conceive  a  murderer  as  having  in  him  that 
divine,  that  spiritual  life  which  alone  corresponds  to 
St.  John's  use  of  the  word  "  eternal." 

Passing  from  the  negative  to  the  positive  illustra- 
tion, he  continues  : — 

"  Hereby  we  have  learnt  to  know  what  love  is — because  He,  on 
our  behalf,  pledged  His  life  ;  and  we  ought  to  pledge  our  lives  for 
the  brethren.  But  whoever  hath  this  world's  sustenance,  and  con- 
templates (eeaipfj)  his  brother  suffering  want,  and  locks  up  from  him 
his  pity,^  how  doth  the  love  of  God  abide  in  him  ]  Let  us  not  love 
with  word  nor  yet  with  tongue,^  but  in  deed  and  in  truth"*  (iii. 
16—18). 

Cain  has  furnished  the  most  awful  warning  against 
hatred.  There  can  be  but  one  example,  which  is  the 
most  emphatic  exhortation  to  love — namely.  He  who 
loved  even  His  enemies,  and  proved  His  love  for  them 
by  His  death.  Cain  slew  his  brother  because  he  hated 
him  for  his  goodness ;  Christ  died  for  sinners  because 

^  Here  again  we  have  the  double  fact  of  a  warning  accompanied  by  the 
assertion  tliat  [ideally)  it  is  quite  needless. 

2  (Tirxdyxfa  rachamivi,  Prov.  xii.  10  (tender  mercies). 

3  "  Sermone  otioso,  lingua  simulante  "  (Beugel). 

*  Mt)  /xo(  dvrip  yXdixaTi  ut]  <pl\os  dwd  Kal  epyip  Xepcriv  re  (TirevSoi  xp-qfjuxcri  r' 
dti<p6-repa  (Theoguis) ;  "Ye  knot  of  mouth-hieuds "  (Sliaksp.,  Timon  of 
Athens). 


440  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

He  loved  them  in  their  iniquity.  The  phrase  rendered 
in  the  English  version,  "  He  laid  down  His  life,"  is 
found  in  St.  John  only,  but  it  is  one  of  which  he  is 
specially  fond.^  He  borrows  it  from  the  discourses  of 
our  Lord,  and  it  is  therefore  coloured  in  all  probability 
by  Hebrew  analogies.  If  the  reference  be  to  Isaiah 
liii.  10,  it  involves  the  conception  of  laying  down  life 
as  a  pledge,  a  stake,  a  compensation.  We  ought  to 
do  the  same  according  to  the  measure  of  need.  But 
how  can  any  man  do  this  who  grudges,  or  coldly 
ignores,  the  simplest,  most  initial,  most  instinctive 
acts  of  kindness  to  his  suffering  brethren  ? — who,  like 
the  fastidious  Priest  and  the  icy-hearted  Levite  of  the 
parable,  can  coldly  stare  at  his  brother's  need,  and 
bolt  against  him  the  treasure-house  of  natural  pity  ? 
How  can  the  man  who  thus  shows  that  he  has  no  love 
in  him,  love  God  who  is  all  love  ?  Thus  we  see  that 
with  St.  John,  as  with  St.  Paul,  the  loftiest  principles 
lead  to  the  humblest  duties,  and  even  as  it  takes  the 
whole  law  of  gravitation  to  mould  a  tear  no  less  than  to 
shape  a  phmet,  so  the  element  or  obligation  of  kindness 
to  the  suffering  is  made  to  rest  on  the  infinite  basis  that 
God  is  Love.  The  man  who  is  capable  of  such  unnatural 
hardness  as  St.  John  describes,  is  quite  capable  of  the 
hypocrisy  of  profession.  Like  the  vain  talker  in  St. 
James  (ii.  16),  he  will  doubtless  tell  the  sufferer  how 
much  he  pities  him  ;  he  will  say  to  him,  with  a  fervour 
of  compassion,  "  Be  warmed,"  "  Be  clothed,"  but  he 
has  ten  thousand  cogent  and  ready  excuses  to  show 
why  he  cannot  personally  render  him  any  assistance. 
For  such  lip-charity,  such  mere  pleasantly-emotional 
pity,  such  eloquent  babble  of  hard-heartedness,   wear- 

1  Jolm  X.  11.  15,  17,  18;  xiii.  37,  38;  xv.  13. 


RECAPITULATION.  441 

ing  the  cloak   of  compassion,  he  warns  them  to  sub- 
stitute the  activity  and  reality  of  love. 

The  recapitulation  which  follows  is  extremely 
difficult,  and  all  the  more  so  because  the  punctuation 
is  uncertain,  the  construction  unusual,  the  readings 
unsettled.  I  give  the  rendering  which,  on  the  whole, 
approves  itself  to  my  mind,  but  I  am  far  from  certain 
that  it  is  correct.  Other  versions  and  other  inter- 
pretations are  almost  equally  tenable,  and  I  incline  to 
the  view  that  there  is  either  some  corruption  in  the 
text,  or  that  some  confusion  may  have  arisen  in  the 
dictation  of  the  Epistle.  The  difficulty  in  interpreting 
the  words  of  St.  John  is  almost  always  the  difficulty 
of  fathoming  the  true  depth  of  his  phrases  —  the 
difficulty  of  understanding  the  full  spiritual  meaning 
of  his  words.  His  style  is,  for  the  most  part,  incom- 
parable in  its  lucidity,  and  there  must  be  some  dis- 
turbing element  which  renders  it  impossible  in  the 
next  two  verses  to  be  at  all  sure  that  we  have  ascer- 
tained what  he  meant,  or  even  what  he  said. 

"  And  hereby  sliall  we  recognise  that  we  are  of  the  truth,  and  we 
shall  in  His  sight  assure  our  hearts  :  ^  because  if  our  heart  condemn 
us,  [because]  God  is  greater  than  our  heart,  and  recogniseth  all 
things  "2  (iii.  19,  20). 

^  ■n-eia-oij.ev  seems  to  mean  we  sliall  still  the  questionings  of  our  hearts  ; 
persuade  them  that  the  view  which  they  take  of  our  frailties  is  too 
despairing.  Haupt's  rendering,  "  we  shall  soothe,"  only  lies  in  the  con- 
text, not  in  the  word  (comp.  Actsxii.  20,  TreiaavTes  BAda-Tov;  E.  y.,  "having 
made  Blastus  their  friend ;  "  Gal.  i.  10). 

-  I  cannot  at  all  accept  the  version  of  Haupt,  or  his  explanation  of 
tliis  extremely  difficult  passage.  He  takes  it  to  mean,  "  In  tliis  love  rests 
our  consciousness  that  we  are  of  the  truth,  and  by  it  may  we  soothe  our 
liearts,  in  all  cases  in  which  {Sn  idv)  our  heart  condemns  us,  for  God  is 
greater  than  our  hearts  and  knoweth  all  things."  Tlie  difficulty  lies 
partly  in  the  repeated  Uti.  If  the  first  Hn  means  "  because,"  the  second 
must  also  mean  "  because,"  and  this  gives  a  very  awkward  clause,  and 


442  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

"  Beloved,  if  our  heart  condemn  us  not  we  have  conlidence  towards 
God  ;  and  whatsoever  we  ask  we  receive  from  Him,  because  we  are 
keeping  His  commandments,  and  are  doing  the  things  which  are 
acceptable  before  Him.  And  this  is  His  commandment,  that  we 
should  believe  in  the  name  of  His  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  and  love  one 
another  even  as  He  gave  us  commandment.  And  he  who  keepeth 
His  commandments  abideth  in  Him,  and  He  in  him"  (iii.  21 — 24a). 

Assuming  that  the  reading  whicli  I  have  followed 
in  the  first  two  verses  of  this  passage  is  correct,  and 
the  grammatical  construction  admissible,  the  meaning 
will  be  simple.  It  is  that  Brotherly  Love  is  a  proof 
that  we  belong  to  the  kingdom  of  Eternal  Reality, 
and  that  by  this  assurance  we  shall  ever  be  able  to 
still  the  miscriving^s  of  our  hearts.  For  even  if  the 
individual  heart  of  each  one  of  us  knoweth  its  own 
bitterness  and  condemns  itself,  still,  since  we  are 
sincere,  and  have  given  proof  of  our  sincerity  by  love 
to  the  brethren,  we  may  fall  back  on  the  love  and 
mercy  of  One  who  is  greater,  and  therefore  more  tender, 
than  our  self-condemning  hearts.  He  will  "count  the 
long  Yes  of  life "  against  its  one  No,  or  its  guilty 
moment.     Because  He  recogniseth  all  things — because, 

makes  no  good  sense.  I  therefore  take  the  view  of  the  old  scholiast, 
who  says  "  the  second  ort  is  superfluous  "  (rb  ^ivrtpov  otl  irapfKKei).  We 
fiud  a  similar  instance  of  on  repeated  in  Eph.  ii.  11,  12,  and  in  classic 
writers  (Xeu.  Anah.  v.  16,  §  19,  "  They  say  that  if  not  .  .  .  that  he  will 
run  a  risk  ").  If  it  be  thouirht  an  insuperable  objection  that  in  these 
instances  Sti  always  means  "  tliat  "  and  not  "because,"  I  can  only  suppose 
tliat  the  second  oti  is  really  a  confusion  duo  to  dictation.  I  take  the 
consolatory,  not  the  dark  y\evi  of  the  passage.  I  think  that  St.  John 
meant  us  to  regard  it  as  a  subject  of  hope,  not  of  despair,  that  God  is 
greater  than  our  hearts.  This  certainly  is  most  in  accordance  with  John 
xxi.  17 — "  Lord,  Thou  knowest  all  things  :  Thou  kuowest  that  I  love 
Thee."  It  would  be  useless  to  repeat  the  tediously  voluminous  varieties 
of  exposition  which  have  been  applied  to  the  passage.  [The  Revised 
Version  renders  it,  "  and  shall  assure  our  heart  before  Him,  whereinsoever 
our  heart  condemn  us."] 


BELIEF  AND   LOVE.  443 

knowing  all  things,  He  recognises  that  we  do  love 
Him^ — because,  where  sin  abounded  there  grace  much 
more  abounded^ — because,  as  Luther  said,  the  con- 
science is  but  a  waterdrop,  whereas  God  is  a  deep  sea 
of  compassion — therefore  He  will  look  upon  us 

"With  larger  other  eyes  than  ours, 
To  make  allowance  for  us  all." 

But  if  our  heart  condemn  us  not  of  wilful  failure 
in  general  obedience  or  in  brotherly  love — if  we  can, 
by  God's  grace,  say  with  St.  Paul,  "  I  am  not  conscious 
of  any  wrong-doing  " — then,  when  faith  has  triumphed 
over  a  self-condemning  despair — we  have  that  confi- 
dence towards  God  of  which  St.  John  spoke  at  the 
beginning  of  this  section  (ii.  28),  and  are  also  sure  that 
God  will  grant  our  prayers,  both  personal — that  we  may 
ever  more  and  more  do  the  thing  that  is  right — and  in- 
tercessory— that  His  love  may  be  poured  forth  on  our 
brethren  also.  And  thus  shall  we  fulfil  the  command- 
ments to  believe  and  to  love.  These  two  command- 
ments form  the  summary  of  all  God's  commandments  : 
for  the  one  is  the  inward  spirit  of  obedience,  the  other 
its  outward  form.  He  who  thus  keeps  God's  com- 
mandments, abides  in  God  and  God  in  him. 

The  thoughts  of  the  writer  in  these  verses  are 
evidently  filled  with  the  last  discourses  of  the  Lord, 
which  he  has  just  recorded  in  the  Gospel,  and  which 
he  may  assume  to  be  fresh  in  the  minds  of  his  readers. 
In  these  verses  he  dwells  on  the  same  topics — faith, 
love,  prayer,  union  with  God,  the  Holy  Spirit.  In 
this  clause  he  concludes  the    section,   which  has  been 

^   John  xxi.  17,  Kupje  av  wdyTu  olSas,  av  yiyydcTKds  Sri  (piXtH)  ere. 
2  Rom.  T.  20. 


444  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

devoted  to  the  proof  that  Doing  Eighteousness  and 
Love  of  tlie  brethren  are  the  practical  signs  that  we 
are  sons  of  God.  In  the  second  clause  of  verse  24 — 
which  would  better  have  been  placed  at  the  head  of 
the  next  chapter — he  passes  to  two  new  thoughts, 
which  form  the  basis  of  his  proof  that  the  source  of 
our  sonship  is  the  reception  of  the  Hol}^  Spirit  of  God, 
and  therefore  that  our  confidence  towards  God  {Trapprjcria, 
ii.  28  ;  iii.  21  ;  iv.  17,  18)  may  be  absolute,  even  to 
the  end. 

SECTION   III. 

THE    SOURCE    OF    SONSIIIP. 

"  And  hereby  we  recognise  that  He  abideth  in  us,  from  the  Spirit 
which  He  gave  us.  Beloved,  believe  not  every  spii'it,  but  test  the 
spirits  whether  they  are  from  God,  because  many  false  prophets  have 
gone  forth  into  the  world.  Hereby  ye  recognise  the  Spirit  of  God  ; 
every  spirit  which  confesseth  Jesus  as  Christ  come  in  the  flesh  is 
from  God,  and  eveiy  spirit  which  severeth  Jesus  is  not  from 
God,  and  this  is  the  spirit  of  Antichrist  of  which  ye  have  heard 
that  it  Cometh,  and  now  is  it  in  the  woi-ld  already.  Ye  are  from 
God,  little  children ;  and  ye  have  overcome  them  because  greater  is 
He  who  is  in  you  than  he  who  is  in  the  world.  They  are  from  the 
world  ;  for  this  cause  they  speak  from  the  world,  and  the  world 
heareth  them.  We  are  from  God  ;  he  who  learns  to  know  God 
heareth  us ;  he  who  is  not  from  God  heareth  not  us.'  From  this  we 
recognise  the  spu-it  of  truth  and  the  spirit  of  error  "  (iii.  246 — iv.  6). 

The  change  of  phrase  from  "abide  in  Him  "  (ii.  28) 
to  "  He  abideth  in  us,"  and  the  introduction  of  the  new 
thought  involved  in  the  mention  of  the  Spirit,  mark 
the  beginning  of  a  new  clause.  The  subject  of  this 
clause  is  at  once  stated  in  the  words  "  we  recognise  that 
He  abideth  in  us."     We  are  passing  from  the  fc-sfs  of 

1  "  For  this  have  I  beon  born,  and  for  this  have  I  eonie  into  the  world, 
that  I  should  testify  to  tlio  Truth.  Every  one  wlio  is  of  the  Truth  licarcth 
my  voice  "  (John  xviii.  37). 


THE   SOURCE   OF   SONSHIP.  445 

sonsliip  to  the  source  of  sonsliip.  Following  tlie  same 
method  of  division  which  we  have  already  found  in  the 
previous  sections  of  the  Epistle,  the  Apostle  treats 
of  this  subject  first  in  relation  to  God  in  Christ 
(iv.  1 — 6),  and  then  in  relation  to  our  brother-man 
(7 — 12).  He  who  rightly  confesses  God  in  Christ,  and 
who  proves  the  sincerity  of  that  faith  by  love  to  the 
brethren,  does  so  by  the  sole  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
of  God,  and  it  is  thus  proved  that  he  is  born  of 
God. 

This  possession  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  this  abiding 
of  God  in  us,  is  first  illustrated  by  its  opposite.  The 
denial  of  Christ  is  a  sign  that  we  are  under  the  sway  of 
spirits  which  are  not  from  God,  even  the  spirits  of  false 
prophecy  and  of  Antichrist.  The  characteristic  of 
the  men  whom  these  spirits  deceive  is  to  deny  the  Lord 
that  bought  them,^  and  to  apostatise  from  the  worship 
of  Christ  to  the  worship  of  the  Beast. ^  That  such 
spirits  were  at  work  even  thus  early  we  have  already 
seen  in  the  warnings  of  St.  Paul,  St.  Peter,  and  St. 
Jude.  And  the  peril  which  they  caused  was  enhanced 
by  this ;  they  were  at  work  in  the  bosom  of  the  Church 
itself  When  St.  John  says  that  they  have  gone  forth 
into  the  world,  he  does  not  mean  that  they  are  severed 
from  the  Chui'ch,  for  if  this  had  been  the  case  there 
would  have  been  no  need  to  test  them,  or  to  be  on  guard 
against  them,  since,  as  regards  the  Christian  community, 
they  would  have  stood  self-condemned.  But  while  still 
nounnally  belonging  to  the  visible  Church,  the  nature 
of  their  teaching  stamped  them  as  belonging  really 
to  the  world.  Every  Christian,  therefore,  had  need  to 
"  test  the  spirits  ; "  he  was  required  to  exercise  that 
1  2  Pot.  ii.  2.  2  Rev.  xiii.  8. 


446  THE    EARLY    DATS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

grace  of  "  the  discernment  of  spirits  "  to  which  St.  Paul 
had  called  the  attention  of  his  Corinthian  converts.^ 
In  Corinth  the  terrible  abuses  of  glossolaly  had  led 
to  outbreaks  which  entirely  ruined  and  degraded  the 
order  of  worship.  Amid  the  hubbub  of  fanatical 
utterances  voices  had  even  been  heard  to  exclaim 
"Anathema  is  Jesus."  Those  hideous  blasphemies,  due 
to  secret  hatred  and  heresy,  had  sheltered  themselves 
under  the  plea  of  uncontrollable  spiritual  impulse,  and 
St.  Paul  had  laid  down  as  distinctly  as  St.  John,  and 
almost  in  the  same  terms,  that  the  confession  of  Jesus 
as  Lord  could  only  come  from  the  workings  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  of  God,  and  that  any  one  who  spoke  against 
Jesus,  however  proud  his  claims,  could  not  be  speaking 
by  the  Spirit  of  God.  It  is  interesting  to  find  the  two 
Apostles  so  exactly  in  accord  with  one  another.  It 
is  even  difficult  to  imagine  that  St.  John  could  have 
^vi'itten  this  passage  without  having  in  mind  what 
St.  Paul  had  said  to  the  Corinthians.^  But  even  if  not, 
we  have  another  proof  how  absurd  is  the  theory  which 
places  the  two  Apostles  in  deadly  antagonism,  whereas 
again  and  again  there  is  a  close  resemblance  between 
them,  not  only  in  the  expressions  which  they  use, 
but  also  in  the  entire  systems  which  they  maintain. 

Here,  then,  was  to  be  the  test  w^hich  each  Christian 
could  apply.  Every  spirit  was  of  God  who  confessed 
"  Jesus  Christ  come  in  ihc  fcshy  There  were  even  in 
those  early  days  professing  Christians  who  said  that 
Jesus  was  indeed  the  Christ,  but  that  the  Christ  had 
not  come  in  the  flesh.  They  maintained  that  during 
the  public  ministry  of  Jesus,  the  spirit  of  the  Divine 
Christ  had  been  with  Him,  but  onl}^  till  the  crucifixion ; 

^  1  Cor.  xii.  10.  «  1  Cor.  xii.  3. 


"SEVERING  JESUS."  447 

SO  that  the  Incarnation  of  the  Divine  in  the  human 
nature  was  nothing  but  a  semblance.  These  were  the 
forerunners  of  the  sect  of  Docetists.  There  were  others, 
again,  who  regarded  the  life  of  Jesus  as  homogeneous 
throughout,  but  denied  that  he  was  the  Christ  in  any 
other  sense  than  that  He  was  the  Jewish  Messiah ; 
denied  that  he  was  Christ  in  the  sense  of  being  the 
Son  of  God.  These  were  the  early  Ebionites.  Against 
them  both  St.  John  had  erected  his  eternal  barrier 
of  sacred  testimony  when  he  wrote  "  The  Word  became 
flesh,"  a  testimony  which  he  here  repeats,  and  which 
he  expresses  no  less  plainly  in  verse  14,  when  he  says, 
"  We  have  seen  and  do  testify  that  the  Father  has 
sent  His  Son  as  Saviour  of  the  World."  Every  spirit 
was  from  God  which,  speaking  in  the  mouths  of 
Christian  prophets,  confessed  that  Jesus  who  was  a 
man  was  also  the  Incarnate  Son  of  God. 

The  next  verse  (3)  begins  in  the  Authorised  Ver- 
sion, "  And  every  spirit  that  confesseth  not  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  is  not  of  God."  The  first 
correction  which  must  be  made  to  bring;  back  this  verse 
to  the  true  reading  is  to  omit  the  words  "  Christ  is  come 
in  the  flesh."  Not  only  are  they  omitted  by  the  Sinaitic, 
Alexandrian,  and  Vatican  MSS.,  and  absent  from  the 
Vulgate,  Coptic,  and  ^thiopic  versions,  but  also  it  is 
more  accordant  with  St.  John's  manner  to  vary  the  form 
of  his  antithetic  clauses.  The  meaning,  however, 
remains  the  same,  for  by  '*'  confessing  Jesus  "  nothing 
can  be  meant  but  confessing  that  He  is  the  Incarnate 
Son  of  God.  But  in  my  version  I  have  ventured  to 
follow  the  other  reading,  "Every  spirit  which  severs 
Jesus"  {oXvet).  It  is  a  reading  of  deep  interest,  and 
one  which,  if  it  be  genuine,  proves  very  decidedly  the 


448  THE    EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

working  of  those  Gnostic  speculations — at  least  in  their 
germs — which  is  also  presupposed  in  the  later  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul.  The  authenticity  of  those  Epistles  has 
often  been  denied,  on  the  ground  that  they  are  devoted 
to  the  refutation  of  heresies  which,  it  is  asserted,  had 
no  existence  till  at  least  the  second  century.  I  have 
already  endeavoured  to  show  tliat  there  is  no  weiglit  in 
this  argument  ;^  but  if  the  reading  "  which  severs 
Jesus  "  be  indeed  the  original  one,  it  furnishes  the 
clearest  indication  of  the  direction  taken  from  the  first 
by  Gnostic  error.^  The  Docetae  and  Ebionites  had 
already  begun  to  "  sever  Jesus " — to  say  that  He 
was  a  man  to  whom  for  a  time  only  the  Spirit  of  God 
had  been  united,  or  that  He  was  a  man  only  and  not 
the  Son  of  God  at  all. 

It  need,  however,  be  hardly  said  that  the  interesting 
character  of  a  reading  furnishes  no  ground  for  accepting 
it.  But  we  are  under  no  temptation  to  introduce  it  on 
dogmatic  grounds,  seeing  that  even  without  it  we 
have  sufficient  indication  of  the  existence  of  these 
sects. 

At  jBrst  sight  it  might  seem  to  be  fatal  to  the  reading 
that  it  is  not  found  in  any  existing  manuscript.  This 
fact  must  perhaps  suffice  to  exclude  it  from  any  accepted 
text  of  the  Greek  Testament,  yet  this  seems  to  me  to  be 
exactly  one  of  those  cases  in  which  the  reading  of  the 
existing  MSS.  is  outweighed  by  other  authorities  and 
other  considerations.^  In  the  first  place,  the  reading 
is  found  in  the  Vulgate.  Then,  Socrates,  the  ecclesias- 
tical historian,  tells  us  that  Nestorius   "  was  ignorant 

'  Sec  my  Life  of  St.  Paul,  ii.  620.  *  See  supra,  p.  349. 

3  To  express  the  same  thing  technically,  the  diplomatic  is  outweighed 
Ijy  ihti  paradiplomatic  e\'ideuco. 


"SEVERING    JESUS."  449 

that  in  the  ancient  manuscripts  of  the  Cathohc  Epistle  of 
John  it  had  been  written  that,  '  Every  spirit  which 
SEVERS  Jesus  is  not  from  Grod.'  "^  He  adds,  that  those 
who  wished  to  sever  the  Divinity  of  Jesus  from  His 
Humanity,  "took  away  this  sense  {rauTrjv  rrjv  hdvotav  iK 
Twv  iraXalwv  avTuypd<pwv  irepteiXov)  from  the  ancient  manu- 
scripts." How  Diisterdieck  and  others  can  here 
maintain  that  Socrates  does  not  mean  to  assert  that 
the  reading  "  severs  Jesus  "  toas  actually  found  in  these 
old  manuscripts,  is  more  than  I  can  understand.  There 
is  no  other  reason  for  mentioning  the  manuscripts  at 
all.  Socrates  clearly  means  to  charge  the  Nestorians 
with  the  falsification  of  the  text.  Irenseus  also,  in 
denying  all  claim  of  Christian  orthodoxy  to  those  who, 
under  pretence  of  gnosis,  drew  distinctions  between 
Jesus  and  Christ,  between  the  Only  Begotten  and  the 
Saviour,  refers  to  this  passage  and  quotes  it,  "  Et 
omnis  spiritus  qui  solvit  Jesum  non  est  ex  Deo."^ 
Origen,  again,  on  Matt.  xxv.  14,  quotes  the  verse  in  the 
same  way,  and  adds  "  we  thus  reserve  for  each  substance 
its  own  proper  attributes."^  Again,  TerfcuUian,  in 
referring  to  the  first,  second,  and  third  verses  of 
this  chapter,  sums  them  up  in  the  words  "  Joannes 
Apostolus  ....  antichristos  dicit  processisse  in 
mundum  (verse  1)  .  .  .  .  negantes  Christum  in  came 
vcnisse    (verse    2),     et    solventes    Jesum "     (verse    3).* 

'  ityp6r]ffev  on  iv  rf/  KadoXiKrj  'Icodvvov  iyeypairTO  (v  rots  iraKalois  avTiypd- 
(pois  OTi  irav  nvivfia  '6  \vei  rhv  'Irjcrouj'   k-t.\.    (Socrates,  H.  E.  vii.  32). 

^  Iren.  c.  Haer.  iii.  8. 

^  "  Haec  autem  dicentes  non  SOLVIMUS  suscepti  corporis  liominein, 
cnm  sit  scriptum  apud  Joanneui,  '  Omnis  Spiritus  qui  solvit  Jesum  nou 
est  ex  Deo,'  sed  unicuique  substantiae  proprietatem  servamus  "  (Origen, 
I.e.). 

*  Terfc.  adv.  Marc.  v.  16,  and  adv.  Psych.,  "  quod  Jesum  Christum 
solvant." 

d  d 


450  THE   EARLY  DAYS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

Once  more,  St.  Augustine  has  the  expression,  "  He 
severs  Jesus,  and  denies  that  He  has  come  in  the 
flesh."  Against  these  testimonies — unmistakable 
as  they  are — it  is  usual  to  urge  the  supposed  silence 
of  Polycarp,  who,  in  his  letter  to  the  Philippians, 
says,  "  but  every  one  who  does  not  confess  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  is  Antichrist."  Clearly, 
however,  this  may  be  a  general  reference  to  the  second 
verse,  and  furnishes  no  proof  that  the  reading  "  severs  " 
may  not  have  occurred  in  this  third  verse  even  in 
Polycarp's  time.  That  he  should  not  quote  it  is 
sufficiently  accounted  for  by  its  difficulty.  There  is 
a  compression  in  it  which  requires  explanation.  It 
involved  a  profound  and  prescient  allusion  to  heresies 
which  as  yet  were  vague  and  undeveloped.  It  needed 
for  its  full  understanding  the  light  which  was  to  be 
thrown  upon  it  by  subsequent  history,  when  heresy 
after  heresy  was  occupied  in  "  severing  "  the  One  Person, 
or  isolating  one  or  other  of  the  Two  Natures.  When 
we  consider  the  proofs  that  the  reading  did  really  exist 
in  early  texts ;  that  there  was  every  temptation  to  add 
explanatory  glosses  to  explain  its  difficulty ;  that  it  was 
easy  for  such  an  explanatory  gloss  as  "  does  not  confess  " 
to  creep  in  from  the  previous  text ;  that  the  explanatory 
gloss  "  Christ  come  in  the  flesh  "  has  actually  so  crept  in; 
that  the  later  addition  is  easily  accounted  for  by  the 
need  of  explaining  the  words  "  who  does  not  confess 
Jesus,"  words  which  by  themselves  gave  no  adequate 
meaning ;  that,  lastly,  it  is  St.  John's  almost  invariable 
manner — a  manner  founded  on  the  laws  of  the  Hebrew 
parallelism  in  which  he  had  been  trained — to  introduce 
into  the  second  clause  of  his  antitheses  some  weighty  ad- 
ditional element  of  thought ; — when  we  remember,  lastly, 


KNOWING  GOD.  451 

what  force  there  is  in  this  old  reading — what  a  flash  of  in- 
sight it  involves — then  we  may  be  reasonably  confident 
that  it  represents  what  St.  John  really  wrote.  Nothing 
but  its  difficulty  led  to  its  early  obliteration  from  the 
common  texts.  We  have,  then,  this  result ; — that  the 
disintegration  of  the  divine  and  the  human  in  the  nature 
of  Jems  was  the  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the 
spirit  of  Antichrist.  It  is,  he  adds,  the  spirit  which 
speaks  out  of  worldly  inspiration,  and  meets  with 
worldly  approval;  but  they  who  are  of  God  have 
prevailed  over  the  Antichrists  by  holding  fast — un- 
shaken, unseduced,  unterrified — their  good  confession. 

The  power  to  make  this  good  confession  comes  from 
the  Spirit  of  Grod ;  and  so  also  does  the  power  to  love  our 
brethren. 

"  Beloved,  let  us  love  one  another.  For  Love  is  from  God,  and 
every  one  that  loveth  hath  been  born  of  God,  and  recogniseth  God. 
He  that  loveth  not  never  recognised  God,  because  God  is  love.^ 
Herein  was  the  love  of  God  manifested  in  us,  that  God  hath  sent  His 
Son,  His  only  begotten,  into  the  world,  that  we  may  live  by  Him. 
Herein  is  love,  not  that  we  loved  God,  but  that  He  loved  us,  and 
sent  His  Son  as  a  propitiation  for  our  sins.  Beloved,  if  thus  God 
loved  us,  we  also  ought  to  love  one  another.  God  no  one  has  ever 
seen.  If  we  love  one  another  God  abideth  in  us,  and  His  love  has 
been  perfected  in  us  "  (iv.  7 — 12). 

In  the  deep  language  of  St.  John,  the  recognition 
of  God — the  learning  to  know  Him  {yiyvcoa-KeLv) — is  a 
much  greater  attainment  than  merely  knowing  a5out 
Him,  and  having  heard  of  Him.  "  The  knowledge  of 
the  Divine  involves  a  spiritual  likeness  to  the  Divine, 
and  rests  upon  a  possession  of  the  Divine."     And  this 

1  See  Aug.  de  Trinitate,  ix.  2.  "  God  is  Love,"  a  sentence  which  is 
the  summary  and  most  simple  expression  of  what  the  Scripture — the 
whole  Scripture — teaches  us  throughout "  (Hofmann). 

d  d  2 


452  THE   EARLY  DAYS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

possession  of  the  Divine  emanates  in  love  ;  love  must  of 
necessity  radiate  from  its   central   liglit.     The  hatred 
which  wells  from  a  fountain  of  inward  darkness  proves 
at  once  that  the  knowledge  and  love  of  Grod  does  not 
exist  in  the  heart  of  him  who  hates.     His  hatred  is  the 
more,  not  the  less,  guilty  if  it  tries  to  hide  itself  under 
a  cloak  of  religiousness.     For  God  is  Love.     If  Light 
he  His  metaphysical  essence.  Love  is  His  ethical  nature. 
The    unfathomable    and    inconceivable    fulness    of  life 
which    is    named    Light    is,    from    eternity    to    eter- 
nity,   existent    only   under    the    form    of    Love.       If, 
then,  God  is    Love,   everything  which  He   does   must 
have   love   for  its    sole   aim,    and  must,    therefore,    be 
a  communication  of  Himself     Every  one  who  knows 
Him  is  born  of  Him,  for  "  Him  truly  to  know  is  life 
eternal ;  "  and  every  one  who  is  born  of  Him  is  a  child 
of  Light,  and  reflects  His  Light  in  the  form  of  love. 
For  He  has  sent  His  Son  into  the  world  to  give  us  life ; 
and  this  life  manifests  itself  in  us  as  love,  which  is  thus 
of  its  very  nature  Divine.     The  love  we  are  enabled  to 
show    is    not    earthly,    not    human,    not    animal — it  is 
Divine.     It  is  an  effluence  of  the  Love  of  God  poured 
into   our  hearts,  and  streaming  forth  from  them  upon 
others.     St.  John  is   not   here   speaking  of  the   mere 
slightly  expanded  egotism  of  family  afiections,  or  per- 
sonal likings ;  he  is  speaking  of  Christian  love,  of  the 
love  of  man  as  man.     That  love  is  a  flame  from  the 
Divine  flame.     Christ  rendered  it  possible  when  He  died 
as  a  propitiation  for  us  ;  it  becomes  actual  when  He  is 
Christ  in  us.     When  we  possess  the  Light  it  will  cer- 
tainl}'^  shine  before  men.     No  one  has  ever  seen  God; 
our  fellowship  with  Him  is  not  visible.     But  it  is  much 
nearer,  for  it  is  spiritual.     He  is  not  only  with  us.  He  is 


CONFIDENCE.  453 

in  us ;  and,  therefore,  His  Love,  in  all  its  perfection, 
dwells  within  us,  proving  its  existence  by  continuous 
love  to  all  our  brethren,  whether  in  the  Church  or  in  the 
world. 

Then  follows  the  summary  of  the  last  two  sections  : — 

"  Hereby  we  recognise  that  we  abide  in  Him,  and  He  in  us, 
because  He  hath  given  to  us  of  His  Spirit.  And  we  have  beheld, 
and  bear  witness  that  the  Father  hath  sent  the  Son  as  a  Saviour  of 
the  world.  He  who  has  confessed  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  God 
abideth  in  him,  and  he  in  God.  And  we  have  learnt  to  know  and 
have  believed  the  love  which  God  hath  in  us.  God  is  Love,  and  he 
who  abideth  in  love  abideth  in  God,  and  God  in  him"  (iv.  13 — 16). 

These  verses  state  the  conclusion  to  which  the 
Apostle  has  led  us — namely,  that  neither  confession  of 
Christ  nor  love  to  the  brethren  are  possible  without  the 
aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  Grod.  If,  then,  we  have  so 
confessed  Christ,  and  if  we  love  the  brethren,  we  have 
received  the  Spirit  of  God,  and,  therefore,  have  fellow- 
ship with  Grod,  and  are  His  sons.  We  abide  in  Him, 
and  He  in  us.  It  only  remains  to  show  that  this  gives 
us  the  confidence  {irapprja-Lo)  of  which  he  had  spoken  in 
ii.  28,  at  the  very  beginning  of  the  entire  section. 

"By  this"  (i.e.  by  all  that  I  have  now  urged ^)  "love  hath  been 
perfected  with  us,'^  in  order  that  we  may  have  confidence  in  the  day 
of  judgment,  because  as  He  (Chi-ist)  is,  we  also  are  in  this  world. 
There  is  no  fear  in  love,  but  perfect  love  castetli  out  fear,  because 
fear  hath  punishment,  but  he  that  feareth  hath  not  been  perfected  in 
love"3(iv.  17,  18). 

1  fv  TovTtf),  as  in  ii.  6,  refers  to  what  precedes,  as  in  John  iv.  37,  xvi. 
30. 

2  "  With  us  " — i.e.,  in  the  midst  of  the  Church.  "  God  magnified  His 
mercy  with  her  (/uer'  avrrjs)  "  (Luke  i.  58). 

^  "  We  received  not  the  spirit  of  slavery  again  to  fear,  but  ye  received 
tlie  spirit  of  adoption  "  (Rom.  viii.  15).     There  is,  of  course,  a  righteous 


454  THE   EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

The  best  comment  on  the  first  of  these  verses  will 
be  found  in  the  discourses  of  our  Lord  in  John  xvii.  14 — 
26.  If  we  have  the  fellowship  with  God  of  which  he 
has  spoken,  then,  though  the  Church  is  still  in  the  world, 
we  have  become  like  Christ,  and  may  answer  with  bold- 
ness on  the  Judgment  Day.  For,  just  as  we  are  con- 
demned already  if,  by  not  believing,  we  have  rejected 
the  Light  for  the  darkness — so,  if  we  have  believed,  we 
anticipate  the  sentence  of  acquittal.  Fear  is  inseparable 
from  the  self-condemnation  which  results  from  being 
separated  from  Grod  ;  it  is  an  anticipated  punishment ; 
it  cannot  co-exist  with  love ;  where  it  exists,  there  the 
love  is  not  real  love,  for  it  is  still  imperfect  and  impure. 


Thus,  then,  St.  John  has  completed  one  great  part  of 
his  announced  design.  He  has  written  in  order  that 
Christians  may  have  fellowship  with  God,  and  fellowship 
with  one  another,  and  that  so  their  joy  may  be  full.  It 
will  and  must  be  full  if  they  have  perfect  confidence  ;  if, 
being  at  one  with  God — they  in  Him,  and  He  in  them — 
they  look  forward  with  perfect  confidence  even  to  that 
hour  when  they  shall  stand  at  the  judgment-seat  of  God. 
Here  he  might  have  closed  this  part  of  his  subject ;  but 
in  one  last  retrospect  (iv.  19;  v.  5)  he  shows  that, 
though  hitherto  he  has  treated  of  our  relation  to  God 
and  our  relation  to  our  brethren  in  separate  sections,  the 
two  relations  are,  in  reality,  indissolubly  one.  And  for 
this  purpose  he  gathers  together  all  the  leading  concep- 
tions   on  which  he   has  been  dwelling — namely,   "  be- 

fcar  (Ps.  xix.),  but  it  lias  in  it  no  alarm  or  terror.  The  highest  state  of 
all  is  to  be  without  fear,  and  with  love  ;  the  lowest  to  bo  "  with  fear,  but 
without  love ;"  or,  without  either  fear  or  love  (see  Beugel,  ad  loc). 
"  Timor  est  custos  et  paedagogus  legis,  doiioc  veniat  caritas"  (Aug.). 


EXHORTATION   TO   LOVE.  455 

lieving  on  Christ "  (v.  5)  as  the  principle  (positively)  of 
"  keeping  Grod's  commandments"  (v.  2),  and  (negatively) 
of  "conquering  the  world"  (v.  4,  5),  and  shows  that 
they  find  their  unity  in  "  loving  our  brother."  From 
love  (iv.  19 — 21),  and  from  faith  (v.  1 — 5),  spring  alike 
our  duty  to  Grod  our  Father,  and  our  duty  to  our  brother 
man. 

"  Let  us  love,  because  He  first  loved  us.  If  any  one  say  I  love 
God,  and  hate  his  brother,  he  is  a  liar :  for  any  one  who  loveth  not 
his  brother  whom  he  hath  seen,  in  what  way  can  he  love  God  whom 
he  hath  not  seen  1  And  this  command  we  have  from  Him,  that  he 
who  loveth  God,  love  also  his  brother"  (iv.  19 — 21). 

"  Every  one  who  believeth  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ/  has  been 
Vtorn  of  God,  and  every  one  who  loveth  Him  that  begat  loveth  also 
Him  who  hath  been  begotten  of  Him.  Hereby  we  recognise  that  we 
love  the  children  of  God,  when  we  love  God  and  do  His  command- 
ments. For  this  is  the  love  of  God,  that  we  keep  His  command- 
ments. And  His  commandments  are  not  heavy,-  because  eveiything 
that  has  been  born  of  God  conquers  the  world.  And  this  is  the 
victory  which  conquered  the  world — our  faith. "^  Who  is  he  who  con- 
quereth  the  world,  except  he  who  believeth  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of 
Godi"  (v.  1—5). 

In  the  first  of  these    two    sections   he  exhorts    to 
universal  love,  and  shows  that,  since  Grod  is  Invisible, 

^  "  In  this  part  of  his  treatment,"  says  Beugel,  "the  Apostle  skilfully 
so  arranges  his  mention  of  Love,  that  Faith  may  be  observed  at  the  close, 
as  the  prow  and  stern  of  the  whole  treatment." 

2  "  jyfy  yoke  is  easy,  and  my  burden  liglit  "  (Matt.  xi.  36).  "  Da  quod 
jubes,  et  jube  quod  atIs  "  (Aug.).  "  His  commandments  are  not  gi'ievous 
because  love  makes  them  light ;  they  are  not  grievous,  because  Christ 
gives  strength  to  bear  them.  Wings  are  no  weight  to  the  bird  which 
they  lift  up  in  the  air  uutil  it  is  lost  in  the  sky  above  us,  and  we  see  it  no 
more,  and  hear  only  its  note  of  thanks.  God's  commands  are  no  weight 
to  the  soul,  which,  tlirough  His  Spirit,  He  upbears  to  Hiiuself  ;  nay.  rather 
the  soul  through  them  the  more  soars  aloft,  and  loses  itself  in  tlie  Son  of 
God  "  (Pusey). 

2  Because  by  faith  in  Christ  we  become  one  witli  Him,  and  sliaro  in 
His  conquest  over  the  world.  "  Be  of  good  cheer,  I  have  overcome  the 
world  "  (John  xvi.  23). 


456  THE  EARLY  DAYS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

there  are  no  possible  means  by  which  we  can  manifest 
our  love  to  Him  except  by  love  to  man,  in  whom  God  is 
made  visible  for  us.  If  we  neglect  these  means,  our 
self-asserted  love  to  God,  since  it  fails  to  meet  the  test 
of  action,  can  be  nothing  but  a  lie.  For  though  God  is 
Unseen,  yet  His  Presence  is  represented  to  us  by  man ; 
and,  again,  though  God  is  Unseen,  He  has  revealed  to 
us  His  will.  And  the  will  which  He  has  revealed,  the 
obedience  which  He  requires,  is,  that  we  love  one 
another.  Not  to  do  so  is  to  violate  His  commandment, 
and  to  insult  His  image  ;  and  he  who  acts  thus  cannot 
love  Him.^ 

In  the  second  clause  his  summary  consists  in  telling 
us  that  faith  in  Jesus  as  the  Christ  is  a  proof  of  our  son- 
ship,  and,  therefore,  can  only  issue  in  love  to  all  God's 
other  children.  If  we  are  loving  God,  and  obeying 
Him,  we  cannot  fail  to  recognise  in  this  very  love  and 
obedience  that  they  are  being  manifested  by  the  spirit 
of  Christian  brotherhood.  It  is  faith  which  won  the 
victory  over  the  world ;  and  faith  is  manifested  in 
love.  Thus  all  the  elements  of  thought  are  gathered 
into  one.  Sonship,  Faith,  Obedience,  conquest  of  the 
world  are  all  essentially  blended  into  an  organic  unity  ; 
and  Love  is  at  once  the  result  of  their  existence  and  the 
proof  that  they  exist. 

SECTION    IV, 

ASSURANCE. 

At  this  point,  then,  the  Apostle  concludes  that  great 
main  section  of  his  Epistle,  which  consisted  in  setting 
forth  the  Word  as  the  Word  of  Life,  in  order  that  we 

^  Johu  xiv.  15,  "  If  ye  love  me,  keep  my  commandments  " ;  xiii.  34. 
'•  A  now  commandmeut  I  give  you,  that  ye  love  one  another." 


THE  THREE   WITNESSES.  457 

may  have  fellowship  with  one  another,  and  with  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  and  that  our  joy  may  be  full.  But 
this  resulted  from  the  historic  revelation  of  which  the 
Apostles  were  appointed  witnesses.  Life  springs  from 
the  Word  ;  hut  the  Church  could  only  be  taught  respect- 
ing that  Word — the  Logos  who  became  flesh — by  the 
testimony  of  the  Apostles  to  His  life  on  earth.  Of  that 
testimony  in  general  his  readers  were  well  aware.  It 
only  remained  to  say  something  as  to  its  cogency  and 
its  results.  This  he  does  in  v.  6 — 9  and  10 — 12. 
The  witnesses  are  these  : — 

"This  is  He  who  came  by  means  of  water  and  blood,  Jesus 
Christ;^  not  by  the  water  only,  but  by  the  water  and  the  blood. 
And  the  Spirit  is  that  which  witnesseth  because  the  Spirit  is  the 
truth.  Because  there  are  three  who  bear  witness,  the  Spirit,  and 
the  water,  and  the  blood,  and  the  three  tend  to  the  one  thing  (viz.^ 
the  possession  of  Eternal  Life  in  Jesus  Christ)  "  ^  (v.  6 — 8). 

I  have,  of  course,  omitted  the  words  "  on  earth " 
and  the  verse  about  the  three  heavenly  witnesses.^     The 

^  This  (see  infra,  p.  463)  can  only  refer  primarily  to  historic  facts  in 
the  Life  of  Christ.  "  He  came  by  Water — which  is  our  laver  {\ovTpov) — 
and  by  Blood — which  is  our  ransom  {Kvrpov)."  _ 

-  Comp.  John  xvii.  23.  "  I  in  them,  and  Thou  in  me,"  Iva  &(n  rerfKnu- 
fifvoi  els  iv  (consummated  into  one) ;  "  brought  to  a  final  unity,  in  which 
they  attain  their  completeness  "  (Westcott) ;  see  xi.  52.  But  the  meaning 
here  is  not  so  certain.  I  have  supposed  the  words  el(r\v  els  ev  to  mean, 
"are  for" — i.e.,  make  for  "one  thing,"  viz.,  the  truth  in  question,  "in 
unwm  consentiunt."  But  the  "  one  thing  "  may  be  "  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ."  Wordsworth  renders  it,  "  are  joined  into  one  substance,"  which 
suits  John  xvii.  23,  but  hardly  this  passage.  Reuss's  "  Ces  trois  sont 
d'accord,"  is  a  mere  untenable  paraphrase. 

^  They  were  first  translated  in  the  Ziirich  Bible,  1.529,  and  in  Luther's 
edition  of  1534.  First  they  were  printed  in  smaller  type,  or  in  bracketa, 
but  after  1596  without  any  distinction.  In  Greek  they  were  first  printed 
in  the  Complutensian  edition  of  1514,  and  the  3rd  edition  of  Erasmus. 
In  his  editions  of  1616  and  1518  he  omitted  them,  but  having  pledged 
Limself  to  introduce  them  if  found  in  a  single  Greek  manuscript,  he  did 


458  THE  EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

spuriousness  of  that  verse  is  as  absolutely  demonstrable 
as  any  critical  conclusion  can  be.  It  is  omitted  in  all 
Greek  manuscripts  before  the  sixteenth  century  ;  it  was 
unknown  to  any  one  of  the  Greek  Fathers  before  the 
thirteenth  century  ;  it  is  not  found  (except  by  later  inter- 
polation) in  a  single  ancient  version ;  it  does  not  occur 
in  any  one  of  some  fifty  lectionaries  which  contain  the 
rest  of  the  passage ;  in  the  East  it  was  never  once  used 
in  the  Arian  controversy.  The  only  traces  of  it  are  in 
some  of  the  Latin  Fathers,  and  even  then  in  a  manner 
which  seems  to  show  that,  though  the  verse  may  have 
been  a  marjifinal  annotation,  it  did  not  occur  in  the  actual 
text.^  Had  it  ever  been  in  the  original,  its  disappear- 
ance is  simply  inconceivable,  for  it  contains  a  clearer 
statement  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinit}'  in  Unity  than 
any  other  in  the  whole  Bible.  This,  perhaps,  is  the 
reason  why  it  has  been  so  vigorously  defended.  But 
not  to  dwell  on  the  gross  immorality  of  defending  a  pas- 
sage manifestly  spurious  because  of  its  doctrinal  useful- 
ness, the  passage  is  not  in  the  least  needed  as  a  proof  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  which,  even  without  it,  is 
in  this  very  paragraph  distinctly  indicated  (vss.  6,  9). 
The  demonstrable  spuriousness  of  the  Averse  renders  it, 

so,  thongh  believing  the  MS.  to  be  corrupt — "  Ne  cui  sit  ansa  calum- 
niandi."  On  their  appearance  in  a  leetionary  in  1.549,  Bergenhagen  said. 
'■  Obsecro  chalcographos  et  eruditos  viros  ut  illam  additionem  omittant 
et  restituant  Graeca  suae  priori  iutegritati  et  puritati  propter  yeri- 
tatem." 

1  The  first  distinct  quotation  of  the  words  is  by  Vigilius  Thapsensis, 
at  the  end  of  tlio  fifth  century.  "  If  the  fourth  centm-y  knew  tliat  text, 
let  it  come  in,  in  God's  name ;  but  if  tluit  age  did  not  know  it,  then 
Arianism  in  its  height  was  beat  down  without  the  aid  of  that  verse  ;  and 
let  the  fact  prove  as  it  will,  the  doctrine  is  unshaken  "  (Bentley).  It  is 
not  impossible  that  some  transcribers  may  have  taken  them  from  St. 
Cyprian,  and  written  them  as  a  gloss  on  tlie  margin  of  his  MS.  (Words- 
worth refers  to  Valcknaer,  de  GlussU  in  N.  T.) 


"BY   WATER  AND   BLOOD."  459 

then,  unnecessary  to  show  that  it  breaks  and  disfigures 
the  reasoning  of  the  passage,  because  it  belongs  to  a 
totally  different  order  of  ideas.  There  can  be  little  doubt 
that  it  will  disappear,  as  it  ought  to  disappear,  from 
the  text  of  any  revised  version  of  the  English  Bible. ^ 

But,  omitting  the  spurious  words,  what  does  the 
passage  mean  ?  It  has  a  very  deep  and  true  meaning, 
for  which,  if  Benan  had  sought  more  patiently  and  more 
reverently,  he  would  not  have  called  it  an  "  Elchasaite 
fantasticality."  ^ 

He  says  that  Jesus  Christ  came  by  means  of  water 
and  blood,  and  that  the  water  and  the  blood  are,  witli 
the  Spirit,  three  witnesses,  which  give  one  converging 
testimony.  As  to  what  they  testify,  he  himself  tells  us 
— it  is,  that  God  gave  us  Eternal  Life,  and  that  this 
life  is  in  His  Son.  And  such  being  the  high  truth  to 
which  they  bear  witness,  it  is  most  important  for  us  to 
understand  in  what  way  their  testimony  is  valid — nay, 
in  what  sense  it  can  be  called  a  testimony  at  all.  In 
what  sense,  then,  did  Jesus,  as  Christ — that  is,  Jesus  as 
Son  of  God — come  by  water  and  blood  ?  And  how  do 
this  water  and  blood  constitute  two  separate  witnesses  ? 

It  would  be  simply  impossible  for  any  one  to  answer 
this  question  who  had  not  the  Gospel  before  him.  The 
notion  of  "  Witness  "  is  one  that  plays  a  very  prominent 
part  in  the  writings  of  St.  John.  To  him  Christianity 
is  emphatically  "  the  Truth,"  i.e.  the  eternal,  all-com- 
prehensive Beality,  which  must  pervade  alike  tlie 
thoughts  and  the  actions  of  men.^     But  the  Truth,  so 

'  This  anticipation  was  written  before  tlie  Re\'ised  Version  was 
published  in  June,  1881. 

^  In  Contemporary  Review,  Sept.  1877. 

3  John  i.  14,  17;  viii.  32,  40;  xiv.  17;  xv.  26;  xvi.  13;  xvii.  11,  17; 
xviii.  37. 


460  ,THE   EARLY  DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

far  as  it  rests  on  outward  facts,  must  be  brought  home 
to  men's  hearts  by  "  witness."  This,  of  course,  was 
necessary  from  the  first ;  but  it  was  more  than  ever 
necessary  in  the  days  when  but  few  could  bear  the  testi- 
mony first-hand,  and  when  many  had  begun  to  cavil  and 
to  doubt. 

Now,  in  the  Gospel,  St.  John  has  adduced  and 
elaborated  a  sevenfold  witness  ;^  I,  that  of  the  Father 
(v.  31—37  ;  viii.  18) ;  2,  that  of  Christ  Himself  (viii.  14  ; 
xviii.  37) ;  3,  that  of  His  works  (v.  36  ;  x.  25)  ;  4,  that 
of  Scripture  (i.  45 ;  v.  39,  40,  45) ;  5,  that  of  John  the 
Baptist  (i.  7  ;  v.  33) ;  6,  that  of  the  Disciples  (xv.  27  ; 
xix.  35 ;  xxi.  24) ;  and,  7,  that  of  the  Spirit  (xv.  26  ; 
xvi.  14).  These  seven  include  every  possible  form  of  wit- 
ness. The  first  two  are  inward  and  Divine  ;  the  next 
two  are  outward  and  historical ;  the  fifth  and  sixth  are 
personal  and  experiential,  depending  on  the  capacity  and 
truthfulness  of  righteous  men ;  the  last  is  continuous 
and  irrefragable. 

Again,  in  this  Epistle,  though  St.  John  alludes  to 
the  witness  of  God  (v.  9),  and  of  Christ  (v.  6),  and  to  the 
witness  of  the  Apostles  (i.  2  ;  iv.  14),  and  to  the  witness 
of  the  Spirit  (v.  G),  he  does  not  allude  to  the  four  other 
forms  of  witness,  though  he  adds  to  them  the  witness  of 
absolute  inward  assurance  (v.  10)  to  which  they  give 
rise.  And  he  lays  special  stress  on  the  water  and  the 
blood  as  the  two  separate  and  powerful  testimonies  of 
the  Christ  to  His  own  Divinity.  Now,  in  what  way  did 
He  manifest  Himself  to  be  the  Divine  Saviour  by  water 
and  by  blood  ? 

Clearly  not  by  the  Baptism  of  John,  where  the  water 
played  a  most  subordinate  part,  seeing  that  it  was  not 

^  See  Westcott's  St.  John,  pp.  xJv. — xJvii. 


"BY  WATER  AND   BLOOD."  461 

by  the  water,  but  by  the  Spirit  descending  as  a  dove, 
that  He  was  consecrated  to  His  work. 

Nor,  again,  by  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism,  because  in 
no  conceivable  sense  of  the  words  could  it  be  said  that 
"  Christ  came  "  by  means  of  Christian  baptism  ;  nor  is 
the  institution  of  Baptism  mentioned,  though  the  sym- 
bolic significance  of  water — which,  in  that  Sacrament, 
reaches  its  highest  point — is  indeed  alluded  to.  Water, 
in  the  Grospel,  is  the  symbol  of  new  and  saving  life,^  as 
it  also  is  in  Is.  xii.  3.  More  generally  and  simply,  it  is 
the  symbol  of  purification.  When  our  Lord  speaks  of 
"  being  born  of  water,  and  of  the  Spirit,"  the  two  things 
symbolised  are  seen  in  their  unity — the  water  is  the 
sacramental  instrument  of  spiritual  regeneration  into  a 
holy  life. 

Yet,  since  even  thus  the  expression  that  Christ  came 
"  by  the  medium  of  water"  would  be  strange,  and  by  no 
means  eas}^  of  interpretation,  we  must  wait  to  see  what 
light  may  be  thrown  upon  it  by  the  following  expression, 
that  Christ  also  came  "  by  means  of  blood." 

Here,  again,  it  is  obvious  that  the  primary  allusion 
cannot  be  to  the  Lord's  Supper.  The  word  "  came  " 
has,  in  St.  John,  a  special  and  emphatic  meaning.  It 
implies  the  manifestation  of  Christ  as  the  Redeemer.  It 
cannot,  then,  be  said,  on  any  ordinary  principle  of  inter- 
pretation, that  Christ  "  came  "  by  instituting  the  Lord's 
Supper.  And  that  St.  John,  at  least,  would  not  have 
used  a  term  so  vague  is  clear,  because  there  would  be  no 
explanation  of  it  in  the  Gospel.  There  he  has  not  so 
much  as  mentioned  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
though — in  a  manner  which  we  have  already  seen  to  be 
characteristic    of    him — he    has    indicated    its    deepest 

^  John  iii.  5 ;  iv.  10 ;   vii.  33. 


462  THE   EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

meaning.  Further  than  this,  in  all  direct  allusions  to 
the  Lord's  Supper,  the  wine  is  never  severed  from  the 
bread,  the  blood  from  the  flesh.  Indeed,  for  the  inter- 
pretation of  what  St.  John  means  by  "  blood,"  we  need 
go  no  further  than  this  Epistle,^  where  he  mentions  the 
blood  of  Christ  as  that  which  cleanses  us  from  all  sin.^ 

So  far,  then,  we  have  seen  that  by  "  water  "  and 
"  blood "  St.  John  means  the  symbols  respectively  of 
purification  and  of  redemption — of  regeneration  and  of 
atonement ;  ^  and  so  far  it  may  also  be  truly  said  that 
there  may  be  an  indirect  and  secondary  allusion  to  the 
Sacraments,  just  as  there  is  in  the  third  and  sixth  chap- 
ters of  the  Gospel,  because  in  the  Sacraments  the  sym- 
bolism of  the  water  and  the  blood  finds  its  culminating 
application. 

But  even  yet  we  have  not  seen  how  it  can  be  said 
that  "  Christ  came  hij  means  of  water  and  blood,"  as 
the  means  through  which,  and  "  in  the  water  and  the 
blood  "  as  the  element  in  which  He  came.  And  it  is  no 
small  corroboration  of  the  suggestion  that  the  Epistle 
was  meant  to  accompany  the  Gospel  as  a  kind  of  prac- 
tical commentary  upon  it,  that  it  would  be  impossible 
to  find  any  simple  or  adequate  explanation  unless  we 
had  the  Gospel  in  our  hands.  We  find  it  there  in  a 
fact  recorded  by  St.  John  alone,  but  placed  by  him  in 
such  marked  prominence,  and  corroborated  by  such 
solemn  testimony,  that  the  allusion  in  this  passage  to 

'  .Tolin  vi.  This  discourse,  interpreted  by  the  known  rules  of  Hebrew 
sjinbolism,  is  a  most  important  protection  against  the  superstitions  ^\^th 
wliich  literalism,  and  materialism,  and  ecclesiasticism,  have  surrounded 
the  subject  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  It  shows,  as  plainly  as  language  can 
sliow,  tliat  by  "eating  His  tlosh,  and  drinking  His  blood,"  our  Lord 
meant  the  living  appropriation  of  Himself  by  Faith. 

2  i.  7.  3  ii  2 ;  iv.  10. 


"BY  WATER  AND   BLOOD."  463 

the  fact  so  emphasized  cannot  be  mistaken.  For  in  these 
two  passcif/es  alone,  of  all  Scripture,  are  blood  and  water 
placed  together,  and,  as  if  to  show  yet  farther  the  con- 
nexion between  them,  they  are  in  both  places  prominently 
associated  with  the  notion  of  witness.  The  fact  is, 
that  the  soldier,  coming'  to  break  the  legs  of  the  cru- 
cified, in  order  that  their  bodies  might  be  removed 
before  the  sabbath,  finding  that  Christ  was  dead,  did 
not  break  His  legs,  "  but  one  of  the  soldiers,  with  a 
lancehead,  gashed  His  side,  and  forthwith  came  there- 
out BLOOD  AND  WATER.  "^  Now  if  this  wcrc  simply  a 
physical  fact,  arising  from  the  death  of  Jesus  by  rupture 
of  the  heart,  and  the  natural  separation  of  the  blood 
into  placenta  and  serum,  both  of  which  flowed  forth 
when  the  pericardium  was  pierced,^  even  then  (though 
in  this  case  there  can  only  have  been,  at  most,  a  drop 
or  two  of  water,  visible,  perhaps,  to  St.  John^  oi^ljj  as  he 
stood  close  by  the  cross),  the  symbols  would  not  lose 
their  divine  significance.  This  circumstance  in  the 
death  of  Christ — which,  if  natural,  is  still  to  the  last 
degree  abnormal  and  unusnal — would,  even  in  that  case, 
most  powerfully  suggest  the  symbolism  which  St.  John 
attaches  to  it.  It  would  have  suggested  to  St.  John 
the  thought  that  Christ  came — that  is,  manifested  Him- 
self as  the  Divine  Redeemer — by  virtue  of  the  regene- 
rating and  atoning  power  of  which  the  water  and  the 
blood  were  symbolic.^     But  it  is  doubtful  whether  the 

^  John  xix.  34. 

^  See  Dr.  Stroud,  The  Physical  Cause  of  the  Death  of  Christ,  and  my 
Life  of  Christ,  ii.  424.  In  my  view  of  this  passage  I  entirely  follow 
Haupt. 

^  It  is  natural  to  suppose  that,  after  conducting  the  Virgin  to  his 
home,  St.  John  returned. 

4  "  "VVhy  water.?  why  blood  ?  Water  to  cleanse,  blood  to  redeem  " — 
Ambr.  (De  Sacr.  v.  1). 


464  THE  EARLY  DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

alleged  fact  ever  naturally  occurs  ;  nor  is  it  probable  that 
St.  John  had  enough  scientific  knowledge  to  be  aware 
that  if  it  occurs  it  must  be  a  sign  of  death  ;  nor  is  it 
his  object  to  show  that  the  death  was  real,  since  at 
that  early  period — and,  indeed,  till  long  afterwards — 
the  reality  of  the  death  was  never  for  a  moment  ques- 
tioned.^ In  the  Gospel,  as  here,  the  fact  is  appealed 
to  "that  we  may  believe;"  it  is  adduced  as  a  witness 
that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God.  Consequently,  there  as 
well  as  here,  we  must  suppose  that  in  St.  John's  view 
there  was  something  supernatural  in  the  circumstance  ; 
and  that  there  was  an  obvious  mystery — that  is,  the 
obvious  revelation  of  a  truth  previously  unknown — in 
that  which  it  signified.  The  water  and  the  blood  are 
witnesses,  because,  in  the  culminating  incident  of 
Christ's  redemptive  work,  their  flowing  from  His  side 
set  the  seal  to  His  manifestation  as  a  Saviour,  and  be- 
cause they  are  the  symbols  of  a  living  continuance  of 
that  work  in  the  world.  The  Spirit,  and  the  Water, 
and  the  Blood  are  three  witnesses ;  but  it  is  more  espe- 
cially and  emphatically  the  Spirit  that  beareth  witness, 
because  it  is  through  the  Spirit  that  the  witness  of  the 
Water  and  the  Blood— that  is,  of  Christ's  regeneratiA-e 
and  atoning  power — is  brought  home  to  the  human 
heart.  Thus  "  the  trinity  of  witnesses  furnish  one 
testimony."  Their  threefold  testimony  is,  as  he  proceeds 
to  tell  us,  the  testimony  of  God — 

"If  we  accept  the  witness  of  men,  the  witness  of  God  is  greater  : 
for  this  is  tlie  witness  of  God,  because^  He  hath  witnessed  concerning 
His  Son.     He  who  belie veth  on  the  Son  of  God  hath  the  witness  in 

^  It  will  bo  seen  that  subsequent  study  has  a  little  modified  the  view 
which  1  took  of  tliis  circumsiancc  in  the  hije  of  Christ,  ii.  4_'4. 

2  tJTj  (A,  B,  Vulg.,  Copt.,  Arnioman,  &c.),  not  •;>,  is  the  true  reading. 


THE    WITNESS.  465 

Himself  :  any  one  who  believeth  not  on  God  hath  made  Him  a  liar, 
because  he  hath  not  believed  in  the  witness  which  God  hath  witnessed 
about  His  Son.  And  this  is  the  witness  that  God  gave  to  us  Eternal 
Life,  and  this  life  is  in  His  Son.  He  who  hath  the  Son  hath  the  life ; 
any  one  who  hath  not  the  Son  of  God  hath  not  the  life  "  (vs.  9 — 12) 

In  these  verses  tlie  witness  is  further  analysed.  It 
is  not  mere  human  witness.  It  is  human  in  so  far  as 
the  facts  alluded  to  are  established  by  Apostolic  testi- 
mony ;  but  it  is  infinitely  more.  It  is  divine  testimony, 
and  it  is  divine  testimony  echoed  and  confirmed  by 
inward  witness.  If  it  be  objected  that  the  Purifica- 
tion, and  the  Eedemption,  and  the  quickening  Spirit, 
are  only  in  any  case  witnesses  to  the  believer — that 
they  are  subjective,  not  objective,  the  answer  is  two- 
fold. First  that  St.  John  is  writing  to  believers,  and 
thinking  of  believers  only ;  and,  secondly,  that  both 
the  perfected  witness  of  God  [/xefiapTupijKe) — perfected 
in  the  death  of  Christ  and  the  results  which  sprang 
therefrom ;  and  the  continuous  witness  of  the  Spirit — 
continuous  in  every  conversion  and  every  sacrament — 
are  indeed  primarily  witnesses  to  believers,  but,  through 
believers,  they  are  witnesses  to  all  the  world.  Believers 
alone  possessed  Eternal  Life,  and  it  was  their  unanimous 
witness  that  they  received  it  solely  through  Jesus  Christ 
the  Son  of  God.  The  echo  of  the  divine  witnesses  in 
the  lives  of  Christians  reverberated  the  divine  testimony 
in  thousands  of  echoes  through  all  the  world.  The 
"Nos  soil  innocentes"  of  Tertullian,^ — We  alone,  amid 

The  repeated  '6ti  is  no  doubt  harsh  and  slightly  ambiguous,  for  the  second 
Stj  might  mean  "  that."  For  these  reasons,  or  perhaps  by  a  mere  slip,  it 
was  altered  into  the  easier  7)v.  But  the  meaning  is,  "  we  ought  to  believe 
(1)  because  this  is  God's  witness ;  and  (2)  because  He  has  borne  witness 
concerning  His  Son." 
1  Tert.  Apol.  45. 

e  e 


466  THE  EARLY  DATS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

the  deep  and  gross  and  universal  corruption  of  a  Pagan 
world,  live  innocent  and  holy  lives — was  the  one  argu- 
ment whicli  the  heathen  found  it  most  impossible  to 
resist  or  overthrow.  It  was  the  threefold  witness  of  the 
Spirit,  the  Water,  and  the  Blood,  multiplied  in  the  life 
of  every  Christian,  and  it  became  ultimately  strong 
enough  for  the  regeneration  of  the  world.  Thus  was  it 
that  the  Word  manifested  Himself  to  be  that  which 
St.  John  caUed  Him—"  the  Word  of  Eternal  Life." 

SECTION   V. 

CONCLUSION. 

The  remaining  verses  of  the  Epistle  have  an  interest 
more  special.  St.  John  has  developed  his  main  thesis  ;  he 
has  spoken  of  the  witness  by  which  the  truths  on  which 
it  rested  were  established.  The  rest  is  mainly  recapitu- 
latory. It  touches  again  on  faith  in  Christ,  on  Eternal 
Life,  and  on  Confidence  :  and  it  applies  that  confidence 
to  the  special  topic  of  trust  in  the  eflRcacy  of  prayer 
(vs.  13 — 17).  Then,  with  three  repetitions  of  the  words 
"  we  know,"  he  once  more  alludes  to  Sonship  and  Inno- 
cence, and  severance  from  the  world,  and  union  with 
God  and  with  Clirist,  and  Eternal  Life.  And  he  con- 
cludes with  a  most  weighty  and  pregnant  injunction. 
But  so  rich  was  the  mind  of  the  Evangelist  that,  as  we 
shall  see,  he  cannot  even  recapitulate  without  the  intro- 
duction of  new  and  most  important  thoughts. 

"  These  things  have  I  written  to  you  that  ye  may  know  that  ye 
have  Eternal  Life — to  you  who  believe  on  the  name  of  the  Son  of 
God. 

"  And  this  is  the  confidence  which  we  have  towards  Him,  that,  if 
we  ask  anything  according  to  His  will,  He  heareth  us.  And  if  we 
know  that  He  heareth  us,  whatsoever  we  ask,  we  know  that  we  have 


INTERCESSORY   PRAYER.  467 

the  petitions  which  we  have  asked  from  Him.  If  any  man  see  his 
brother  sinning  a  sin  which  is  not  unto  death,  he  shall  ask  and  shall 
give  him  life  i — to  those  who  are  sinning  a  sin  not  unto  death. 
There  is  a  sin  unto  death.  For  that  I  do  not  say  that  he  should 
make  request.  All  unrighteousness  is  sin,  and  there  is  a  sin  not 
unto  death  "  (vs.  13 — 17). 

The   first  verse  of  this  passage  sums  up  once  more 

the  aim  of  the  Epistle — to  give  assurance  to  all  true 

believers  that   they   have   eternal  life.     Such  a  belief 

makes  us  bold  towards   Grod  in   filial  confidence,^  and 

like  beloved  sons  we  can  ask  for  what  we  need  from  our 

Heavenly  Father.     But  if  our  minds  are  filled,  if  our 

lives  are  actuated  by  Brotherly  love, — if  our  fellowship 

with  God  be  of  necessity  fellowship  jvith  one  another 

— our   prayers   will    constantly   be    occupied   with    our 

brethren ;    they  will  to  a  large  extent  be  intercessory 

prayers  : — 

"  For  what  are  men  better  than  sheep  or  goats, 
That  nourish  a  blind  life  within  the  brain, 
If,  knowing  God,  they  lift  not  hands  of  prayer 
Both  for  themselves  and  those  that  call  them  friend  ; 
For  so  the  whole  round  world  is  every  way 
Bound  by  gold  chains  about  the  feet  of  God." 

The  importance  attached  to  such  prayers  by  the  early 
Christians,  who,  in  passages  like  these,  are  not  even 
thinking  of  personal  prayers  for  any  earthly  blessing, 

1  He,  the  petitioner,  shall  give  life  to  his  brother.  St.  James  exactly 
in  the  same  sense  says  that  he  who  converts  a  brother,  "  shall  save  a  soul 
from  death  "  (James  v.  20).  Nor  does  this  in  the  least  contradict  the 
truth  that  no  man  can  save  his  brother,  and  make  atonement  unto  God 
for  him.  Man  is  but  the  instrument  of  this  deliverance  ;  the  real 
Deliverer  is  God.  (Comp.  Jude  23,  "  And  others  save,  pulling  them  out 
of  the  fire.") 

'  The  irapp-na-la  here  does  not  refer  to  the  Day  of  Judgment,  as  in  iv. 
17,  but  to  trustful  prayer,  as  in  iii.  21,  22 ;  and  as  in  Eph.  iii.  12 ;  Heb. 
iv.  16. 

e  e  2 


468  THE   EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

may  be  shown  by  the  fact  that  there  is  an  allusion  to 
exactly  the  same  kind  of  intercessory  prayer  at  the  very 
close  of  the  Epistle  of  St.  James.  Many  a  prayer  for 
earthly  blessings  may  be  by  no  means  in  accordance 
with  the  will  of  God  ;  and  St.  John  finds  it  here  neces- 
sary to  touch  on  a  prayer  which  is  concerning  spiritual 
things,  and  which  yet  he  cannot  bid  a  Christian  offer. 
But  as  regards  prayer  in  general,  when  a  Christian 
prays  he  knows  that  God  listens,^  and  he  therefore  has 
what  he  asks  for.  He  has  it  even  if  the  prayer  be 
denied,  for  his  prayer  is  not  absolutely  that  something 
which  is  contingent  may  happen,  but  that  God  will 
give  him  the  true  and  the  best  answer  by  making 
the  will  of  the  petitioner  to  be  one  with  His.^  Now 
St.  John  assumes  that  the  Christian  will  pray  for 
the  salvation  of  his  brethren,  but  he  tells  us  that  there 
is  one  instance  in  which  such  a  prayer  will  be  unavail- 
ing. It  is  when  we  see  our  brethren  sinning  a  sin 
which  is  unto  death.  In  other  cases  the  Christian  by 
pra3"er  shall  give  his  brother  life  ;  in  the  case  of  a  sin 
which  is  unto  death  St.  John  cannot  bid  any  Christian 
to  offer  up  his  filial,  his  familiar  prayer.' 

What,  then,  is  this  sin  unto  deatli  ?  Is  it  a  single 
act  ?  is  it  a  settled  condition  ?  Does  it  give  any 
countenance  to  the  distinction  between  mortal  and 
venial  sins?  Is  it  the  same  thing  as  the  blasphemy 
against  the  Holy  Ghost  ?     To  enter  fully  into  all  these 

1  kKowi  ( Joliii  ix.  31 ;  xi.  41,  42). 

*    "  We,  ignorant  of  ourselves, 
Beg  often  our  oavii  liarms,  wliich  the  wise  Powers 
Deny  us  for  our  good.     So  gain  we  profit 
By  losing  of  our  prayers." — (Shakspere). 

3  ^pcoT^enj.     It  is  remarkable  that  this  word  should  be  used  (see  infra, 
p.  471). 


THE   "SIN  UNTO   DEATH."  •      469 

questions  here  would  be  to  break  the  continuity  of  our 
endeavour  to  understand  the  general  scope  of  the 
Epistle.  I  will  therefore  treat  of  them  as  briefly  as 
possible. 

1.  St.  John  cannot  be  thinking  of  any  one  definite 
act  of  sin  (as  is  indeed  sufficiently  proved  by  his  use  of 
the  present  and  not  the  aorist  participle),  because  it 
would  be  simply  impossible  for  any  man,  apart  from 
inspired  supernatural  insight,  to  declare  that  any  par- 
ticular sin  was  a  sin  unto  death.  Saul,  under  strong 
temptation,  broke  a  ceremonial  commandment  of  the 
Prophet  Samuel;  David  committed  adultery  and  murder 
under  conditions  which  made  those  crimes  peculiarly 
heinous.  Who  would  not  have  said  a  priori  that  the 
sin  of  David  was  infinitely  the  more  deadly  of  the 
two  ?  Yet  "  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  departed  from 
Saul,"  whereas  David  was  still  able  to  pray  that  God 
would  give  him  a  new  heart  and  create  a  right  spirit 
within  him — and  his  prayer  was  heard.  Again,  the 
Pharisees  attributed  Christ's  miracles  to  Beelzebub,  and 
in  so  doing  we  are  told  that  they  came  perilously  near, 
af  they  did  not  actually  commit,  the  sin  against  the 
Holy  Ghost.  The  Sadducees  and  the  Pomans,  on  the 
other  hand,  crucified  Him.  Who  would  not  have  said 
that  the  Sadducees  were  the  worse  offenders  ?  Yet 
Christ  pra3^ed  unconditionally  for  His  murderers, 
"Father,  forgive  them;"  and  if  He  gave  the  uncon- 
ditional promise  to  His  disciples  that  "  whatsoever  they 
asked  in  His  name,  believing,  they  should  receive," 
must  we  not  regard  it  as  certain  that  His  own  prayer 
was  heard  ?  Clearly,  then,  a  sin  becomes  a  sin  unto 
death  not  by  its  external  characteristics,  but  by  its 
interior  quality,  and    that   interior  quality  is    for  the 


170  THE   EARLY  DATS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

most  part  undiscernible  by  the  eye  of  man.  The  nature 
of  the  consummating  act,  the  nature  of  the  continuous 
state  which  constitutes  the  sin  unto  death,  may  be 
completely  disguised,  while  the  offender  still  walks 
among  men  in  the  odour  of  sanctity. 

"  So  spake  the  false  dissembler  unperceived  ; 
For  neither  man  nor  angel  can  discern 
Hypocrisy,  tlie  only  evil  that  walks 
Invisible,  except  to  God  alone, 

By  His  permissive  will,  through  Heaven  and  earth  ; 
And  oft,  though  wisdom  wake,  suspicion  sleeps 
At  wisdom's  gate,  and  to  simplicity 
Resigns  her  charge,  while  goodness  thinks  no  ill 
Where  no  ill  seems  :  which  now  for  once  beguiled 
Uriel,  though  regent  of  the  sun,  and  held 
The  shai-pest  sighted  spirit  of  all  in  Heaven ; 
Who,  to  the  fi'audulent  impostor  foul. 
In  his  uprightness,  answer  thus  returned." 

(Paradise  Lost,  iii.  681 — 694). 

2.  There  is  such  a  thing — as  we  have  already  seen 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews — as  absolute  and  desperate 
apostasy,  wherein  a  man  cuts  himself  utterly  loose  from 
all  the  means  of  grace,  and  effectually  closes  their 
influence  upon  him.  There  is  such  a  thing  not  only  as 
wilful,  but  even  as  willing  sin.  There  can  be  such  a 
thing  as  a  deliberate  putting  of  evil  for  good  and  good 
for  evil,  of  bitter  for  sweet  and  SAveet  for  bitter ;  such  a 
thing  as  a  man  selling  himself  to  do  evil,  and  trampling 
under  foot  the  Spirit  of  God.  This,  in  the  view  of  the 
Apostles,  is  connected  with  Antichrist ;  the  man  who 
does  it  is  a  "  man  of  sin  "  ;  it  is  a  deliberate  abandon- 
ment of  Christ  for  Satan,  of  light  for  darkness,  of  life  for 
death.  When  such  a  blaspheming  apostasy  occurred  in 
the  very  bosom  of  the  Church,  he  who  was  aware  that  it 


THE   "SIN  UNTO   DEATH."  471 

had  occurred,  could  only  feel  that,  so  far  as  mere  human 
foresight,  or  human  prayers  on  his  behalf  could  go,  such 
a  man  would  die  in  his  sin/ 

3.  For  such  a  man  a  Christian  could  hardly  offer  the 
prayer  which  is  inspired  with  the  divine  conviction  that 
it  is  heard ;  for  it  is  impossible,  humanly  speaking,  to 
renew  such  a  man  unto  repentance.^  St.  John  feels 
that  he  must  refrain  from  exhorting  Christians  to  offer 
the  highest  kind  of  prayer^ — such  prayers  as  Christ 
offered,  and  which  are  scarcely  ever  predicated  of  any 
other — for  the  most  consummate  form  of  sin.* 

4.  Yet  it  does  not  seem  that  \\q  forbids  even  such 
prayers.^  He  could  not  do  so,  for  he  gives  no  criterion 
by  which  his  readers  could  discern  what  was,  and 
what  was  not,  a  sin  unto  death.  He  only  says,  "  when 
you  see  your  brother  sinning  a  sin  which  you  know 
may  be  forgiven " — and  they  would  learn  from  the 
entire  history  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  well  as  from 
the  Gospels,  that  this  might  be  any  sin  however  appa- 
rently heinous,  were  it  even  such  a  sin  as  that  which 
had  stained  the  Church  of  Corinth,  and  against  which 
the  very  heathen  had  exclaimed  — "  you  may  pray 
for  it  with   the  conviction   that   God  will  hear  your 

1  John  viii.  21—24. 

2  Heb.  vi.  4 — 6,  and  on  tliat  passage  see  Riehm,  Lehrbegr.  d.  Hebrder. 
briefs,  ii.  76S,fg. 

^  ipuT-fia-ri.  The  word  aiVw  (peto),  is  used  of  the  petition  of  an  inferior ; 
epcoTw  {rogo),  of  the  more  familiar  entreaties  of  a  friend.  Hence  our 
Lord  never  uses  aWSi  of  His  own  prayers  ;  and  never  uses  ipuirw  of  the 
prayers  of  tlie  Disciples  (John  xiv.  16  ;  xvi.  26 ;  xvii.  9,  15,  20 ;  which 
show  that  St.  John  felt  and  observed  the  distinction).  We  may  humbly 
aWiiv  the  forgiveness  of  sins  not  unto  death ;  we  may  not  even  ipwrav 
those  of  sins  unto  death. 

■*  By  a  "  sin  unto  death,"  St.  John  meant  absolute  and  wilful  apostacy 
from,  and  abnegation  of,  Christ,  both  theoretically  and  practically. 

'•>  "  Ora,  si  velis,  sed  sub  dubio  im^ietrandi  "  (Calvin). 


472  THE   EARLY   DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

prayer.  But,"  he  adds,  "  you  must  not  expect  that, 
in  every  possible  case,  every  prayer  you  offer  for 
the  sin  of  a  brother  will  be  heard.  For  there  is  a 
sin  unto  death.  Not  respecting  that  sin  am  I  saying 
that  a  Christian  should  make  filial  request."  His 
prayers  must  in  such  cases  take  a  humbler  form  {anelv) ; 
they  must  inevitably  be  offered  up  with  a  less  implicit 
confidence  that  they  will  be  heard  ;  they  must  rather 
consist  of  a  committal  of  the  sinner  to  God's  mercy  than 
an  assured  petition  that  that  mercy  will  be  extended  in 
the  form  which  we  desire. 

5.  We  may  perhaps  derive  some  insight  into  the 
meaning  of  the  sin  unto  death  from  the  language  of 
the  Old  Testament,  with  the  meanings  which  the  Jews 
inferred  from  it,  and  from  those  passages  in  the  New 
Testament  which  seem  to  offer  the  nearest  parallel. 

a.  As  regards  the  Old  Testament,  we  find  the  phrase 
"  a  sin  unto  death  "  (LXX.  hamartia  tlianatephoros)  in 
Num.  xviii.  22,^  Lev.  xxii.  9,^  but  this  does  not  greatly 
help  us,  because  there  the  reference  merely  is  to  sins 
which  were  punished  with  death,  whereas  St.  John  is, 
of  course,  referring  to  spiritual  death,  as  in  iii.  14. 

/9.  Nor,  again,  is  much  light  thrown  on  the  passage 
by  the  crimes  to  which  excision — "  cutting  off  from  the 
— people  "  is  assigned  as  a  penalty  under   the   Mosaic 

>  "Sill  with  high  hand,"  Numb.  xv.  30;  Matt.  xii.  31  (Schottgen, 
ad  loc). 

2  nraV  Npn.  The  references  are  to  the  approach  of  non-Levitical 
persons  to  the  sanctuary,  and  neglect  of  Levitical  purifications.  The 
Rabbis  divided  sins  into  xn'ob  nwcn  and  nn'ob  wb  riNiDn,  "  a  sin  unto  death," 
and  "  not  unto  death."  In  the  Talmud  we  find  "  Five  have  no  forgiveness 
of  sins — (1)  He  who  keeps  on  sinning  and  repenting  alternately;  (2)  he 
who  sins  in  a  sinless  age;  (3)  he  who  sins  on  purpose  to  repent;  (4)  he 
who  causeth  the  name  of  God  to  bo  blasphemed."  The  fifth  is  left 
unexpressed  (Avoth  d'  Rab.  Nathan,  39). 


"DELIVERING  TO  SATAN."  473 

law.  Whatever  interpretation  be  attached  to  those 
words — whether  death  by  divine  interposition,  as  the 
Rabbis  thought,  or  by  the  hand  of  the  civil  power,  as 
others  think,  or  exile,  or  excommunication^ — it  is  quite 
clear  that  the  sins  upon  which  this  excision  {careth)  is 
denounced  are  not  unpardonable,  not  beyond  the  reach 
of  repentance  and  forgiveness. 

7.  Again,  in  no  less  than  three  places,  Jeremiah  is 
forbidden  to  pray  for  the  Jews  (Jer.  vii.  16;  xi.  14; 
xiv.  11);  yet  we  certainly  may  not  infer  that  the  case 
of  all  these  Jews  was  eternally  hopeless,  or  that  though 
they  were  put  beyond  the  range  of  the  prayers  of  men, 
they  were  therefore  for  ever  excluded  from  the  tender 
mercies  of  God. 

^.  In  the  New  Testament  we  find  St.  Paul  twice 
using  the  expression  "  delivering  to  Satan."  The 
offenders  to  whom  he  applies  it  are  the  Corinthian 
sensualist  (1  Cor.  v.  5),  and  Hymenseus,  and  Alexander 
(1  Tim.  i.  20).  Again,  for  Alexander  the  Copper- 
smith, in  2  Tim.  iv.  14,  St.  Paul  offers  no  prayer  but 
this,  "  May  the  Lord  reward  him  according  to  his 
works."  Now  it  is  a  reasonable  inference  that  while 
a  man  was  under  the  sentence  of  the  Church's  excom- 
munication— while  he  was  thus  deliberately  cut  off 
by  their  act  from  the  means  of  grace  —  he  would 
not  have  been  included  in  their  prayers  ;  not,  at  any 
rate,  in  such  prayers  as  they  were  wont  to  offer  up 
for  one  another.  We  see  the  character  of  the  sins 
of  these  men.  The  sins  of  Hymenseus  and  Alexander 
consisted  in  deliberately  rejecting  {aircoa-dfievoc  "  pushing 
away  from  themselves")  faith  and  a  good  conscience, 
and,  in  consequence,  making  shipwreck  of  their  faith, 

^  See  Gesen.  Thes.  s.  v.  rra,  p.  719. 


474  THE  EARLY  DATS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

St.  Paul  delivered  them  to  Satan.  Why?  In  order 
that  they  might  perish  everlastingly?  Far  from  it; 
but  for  a  merciful  and  hopeful  purpose — "  that  they 
may  be  trained  not  to  blaspheme."  A  worse  case 
cannot  be  imagined  than  that  of  the  Corinthian 
offender.  He  was  a  Church-member,  admitted  into 
full  fellowship,  even  supported  by  public  sanction, 
and  yet  he  was  living  in  the  open  practice  of  a  sin  so 
shameful  that,  as  St.  Paul  says,  "it  is  not  so  much 
as  named  among  the  heathen."  No  conduct  could 
be  more  infamous,  not  only  in  itself,  but  also  because 
it  caused  the  name  of  Christ  to  be  blasphemed  in 
that  vile  heathen  world.  With  intense  and  burning 
indignation,  St.  Paul  imagines  himself  present  in 
spirit  in  the  assembly  of  the  Christian  Church,  and 
there  solemnly,  in  the  name  of  Christ,  he  "  hands  over 
the  offender  to  Satan."  If  any  sin  could  be  regarded 
as  a  sin  unto  death,  must  not  this  have  been  such 
a  sin,  seeing  that  it  was  shameless,  continuous,  against 
light  and  knowledge,  the  sin  of  a  Christian  which 
was  not  even  tolerated  by  heathens?  It  was  natural 
that  the  victorious  prayer  of  triumphant  confidence 
should  be  suspended  in  the  case  of  such  a  man.  Yet 
what  is  St.  Paul's  object  in  handing  him  to  Satan? 
Not  by  any  means  his  everlasting  damnation,  but 
"  the  destruction  of  his  carnal  impulses,  in  order  that 
/lis  spirit  may  he  saved  in  the  clay  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  ^ 
The  man  was  handed  to  Satan  by  the  now-aroused 
conscience  of  the  startled  community.  And  what 
was  the  result?  In  his  next  letter,  a  few  months 
afterwards,  St.  Paul  is  once  more  urging  them  to  show 
mercy  towards  this  very  offender.     The  "  handing  to 

'  1  Cor.  V.  5. 


THE   "SIN  UNTO  DEATH."  475 

Satan  "  lias  done  its  work.  The  fleshly  temptation  has 
been  annihilated.  The  man  has  repented.  St.  Paul  is 
now  afraid  lest  he  should  be  injured  by  over  severity. 
He  bids  them  restore  and  ratify  their  love  towards 
the  now  penitent  transgressor,  "  lest  by  any  means  he 
should  be  swallowed  up  by  his  superabundant  sorrow."^ 
Similarly,  in  the  case  of  Alexander,  St.  Paul's  avoid- 
ance of  a  prayer  for  him  is  practically  a  prayer  for  him. 
It  is  not  equivalent — as  is  sometimes  supposed — to  a 
sort  of  curse,  "  May  God  do  him  evil  as  he  has  done 
to  me ; "  for  such  a  prayer — though  a  David  or  a 
Hebrew  exile  may  have  offered  it  in  ignorance,  in 
days  before  the  new  commandment  had  been  uttered — 
in  days  when  it  had  been  said  to  them  of  old  time, 
"Thou  shalt  hate  thine  enemy" — could  not  have  been 
offered  without  sin  by  a  Christian  Apostle.  St.  Paul's 
ejaculation  is  only  another  way  of  saying  "  It  is  not  for 
me  to  judge  him ;  I  leave  him  in  the  hands  of  God." 

From  this  examination  then  we  may  infer  that  St. 
John's  limitation  belongs,  like  so  many  of  his  thoughts, 
to  the  region  of  the  ideal,  the  theoretical,  the  absolute  ; 
that  it  is  only  introduced  as  a  passing,  but  very  solemn, 
reminder  of  the  truth  that  there  is  a  sin  which  is  past 
the  possibility  of  being-  benefited  by  the  Christian's 
prayer ;  a  sin  which  can  be  only  left  to  God,  because 
it  is  discernible  by  Him  alone.  Practically  it  is  most 
unlikely  that  we  shall  ever  become  cognisant  of  any  sin 
in  a  brother  so  heinous,  so  desperate,  so  darkly  deliberate 
in  the  apostate  condition  of  heart  which  it  implies,  so 
obviously  beyond  the  possibility  of  repentance,  that  we 
dare  not  pray  for  it.  On  the  analogy  of  the  language 
used,  both  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  we  must 

1  2  Cor.  ii.  6—8. 


476  THE  EARLY  DATS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

infer  that  even  though  there  be  a  sin  unto  death,  it  is 
not  beyond  the  mercy  of  Him  who  died  "  that  He 
might  destroy  him  who  hath  the  power  of  death,  that 
is  the  devil."  To  God  we  may  leave  it,  if  we  find 
that  we  are  unable  to  offer  up  on  its  behalf  the  prayer 
of  faith.  How  little  we  are  ever  likely  to  realise  the  exis- 
tence of  such  a  sin  we  may  infer  from  this — that  there 
are  only  two  or  three  in  all  the  long  generations  of 
Christian  history  about  whose  salvation  the  Church 
has  ever  ventured  to  express  an  open  doubt. 

We  are  told  in  the  Talmud  that  Beruriah,  the  wife 
of  the  great  Eabbi  Meier,  once  heard  him  ardently 
praying  to  God  against  some  ignorant  people  —  am. 
haraisim — who  annoyed  him.  She  came  to  him  and 
said,  "Do  you  do  this  because  it  is  written  (in  Ps. 
civ,  35)  *  Let  the  sinners  be  consumed  '  ?  But  there  it 
is  not  written  chofaim,  '  sinners,'  but  chittaini,  '  sins.' 
Besides,  the  Psalm  adds,  '  And  let  the  wicked  be  no 
more,'  that  is  to  say,  '  Let  sins  cease,  and  the  wicked 
will  cease  too.'  Pray,  therefore,  on  their  behalf,  that 
they  may  be  led  to  repentance,  and  these  wicked  will 
be  no  more."  This  he  therefore  did,  and  they  repented, 
and  ceased  to  vex  him.^ 

The  whole  tenor  of  Scripture  shows  that,  as  a  rule,  we 
must  herein  follow  the  example  of  the  brilliant  Eabbi. 
But  the  New  Testament  teaches  the  lesson  far  more  fully 
than  the  Old.    The  Church  herself  teaches  us  to  pray — 

"  That  it  may  please  Thee  to  have  mercy  upon  all  men, 

We  lieseecli  Thee  to  hear  us,  Good  Lord." 

And  accordingly  St.  John  instantly  leaves  the  subject  of 
the  sin  unto  death  to  which  he  has  made  this  unique  and 

»  Avodah  Zarah,  f.  18,  b. 


CONCLUSION.  477 

passing  allusion,  and  adds  "  All  unrighteousness  is  sin, 
and  there  is  a  sin  not  unto  death."  Therefore  you  will 
ever  have  the  amplest  scope  for  your  intercessory  sup- 
plications. Practically,  that  scope  is  the  whole  range 
of  unrighteousness,  the  whole  range  of  human  sin.  If 
the  sin  for  which  we  are  interceding  is  a  sin  which  God 
knows,  and  which  we  may  fear  to  be  unto  death,  St. 
John  does  noi  forbid  such  prayers;  for  he  says,  "I  do 
not  say  that  you  should  "  {ov  Xeyco  Xva),  not  "  I  say  that 
you  should  not"  (Xe7w  tm  yJr)).  Clearly  it  can  never  be 
in  our  power  to  decide  what  sins  are  unto  death.  If 
we  unwittingly  pray  for  such  a  sin,  the  Apostle  can 
give  us  no  promise  that  the  intercession  is  of  any  avail. 
But  if  there  be  any  sin  for  which  we  feel  the  genuine 
impulse  to  pray,  we  may  rest  assured  that  that  impulse 
is  an  inspiration,  and  therefore  that  the  prayer  may  be 
offered,  and  will  be  heard. 

Then  the  Epistle  concludes  with  these  words : — 

^'  We  know  that  every  one  who  has  been  born  of  God  sinneth 
not ;  but  he  who  is  born  of  God  keepeth  himself,^  and  the  wicked  one 
graspeth  him  not.^ 

"  Wb  know  that  we  are  of  God,  and  the  whole  world  lieth  in  the 
wicked  one. 

"  But  WE  KNOW  that  the  Son  of  God  is  come,  and  hath  given  us 
understanding,  that  we  recognise  Him  who  is  true,  and  we  are  in 

^  It  is  astonishing  that  Alford,  following  the  Vulgate,  should  render 
this  "but  he  that  hath  been  born  of  God,  it  {i.e.  his  diviue  birth)  keepeth 
him"  ("sed  generatio  Dei  conservat  eum").  There  is  not  the  smallest 
theological  difficulty  involved  in  saying  that  "he  keepeth  himself"  (see 
on  iii.  3).  It  means  that  effort  is  always  necessary  even  for  the  saint — 
oil  (f>v(ret  els  dvaij-apTrjcriai'  irpo^alvei  (CEcumen.). 

*  "  The  Evil  one  approaches  him,  as  a  fly  approaches  a  lamp,  but  does 
not  injure,  does  not  even  touch  him"  (Bengel).  But  a-n-To/xai  with  a 
genitive  properly  means  "  to  lay  hold  of."  Thus  yur?  fiov  airrou  is  not 
Noli  me  tangere,  but  "Cling  not  to  me"  (see  my  Life  of  Christ,  ii. 
424). 


478  THE   EARLY   DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Him  who  is  true,  in  His  Son,  Jesus  Christ.     Tliis^  is  the  true  God. 
and  Life  Eternal. 2 

"  Little  children,  keep  yourselves  from  idols"  (vei*.  18 — 21). 

Here,  as  before,  St.  John  is  beholding  all  things  in 
their  idea.  Here,  and  now,  neither  are  we  absolutely 
sinless,  nor  is  the  whole  world  absolutely  absorbed  in 
sin.  But  in  idea,  in  the  ultimate  truth  of  things,  it 
is  so,  and,  in  the  final  severance  of  things,  it  will  be  so. 
Our  knowledge  that  it  is  and  will  be  so  rests  deep 
among  the  bases  of  all  Christian  faith.  We  know  it 
because  Christ  has  come,  and  has  given  us  discern- 
ment to  recognise  Him  who  is  the  only  Eeality.  We 
are  in  Him,  and  in  His  Son  ;  He,  God  the  Father,  is 
the  Very  God,  and  Eternal  Life.^  For  St.  John  has 
already  said  in  his  Gospel  (xvii.  3),"  This  is  the  Life 
Eternal,  that  they  should  learn  to  know  Thee,  the 
only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ,  whom  Thou  didst 
send." 

The  last  verse  is  a  most  pregnant  warning,  intro- 
duced by  the  Apostle's  most  affectionate  title  of  address 
— Little  children  ! — "  keep  yourselves  from  idols."  He 
is  not,  of  course,  thinking  of  the  gods  of  the  heathen. 
He  is  writing  to  Christians  who  had  long  abandoned 
these,  who  had  not  the  smallest  temptation  to  aposta- 
tise to  their  worship.  He  is  speaking  of  "  subjective 
idolism."  He  is  putting  them  on  their  guard  against 
seductive  notions  of  false  prophets ;  subtle  suggestions 

'  Namely,  the  Father,  as  seen  in  His  Son  (Jer.  x\.). 

2  Thus  tlie  Epistle  ends  as  it  began,  with  Eternal  Life  (Bengel). 
Comp.  John  xvii.  3. 

'  That  the  Father  is  referred  to  seems  to  he  decided  by  John  xvii.  3. 
There  is  notliiiig  abnormal  in  tlie  change  of  subject.  The  Father  is  the 
principal  subjcnit  of  the  wliole  chuiso,  though  the  Son  is  last  named.  For 
a  similar  change  of  subject  see  verse  16,  and  ii.  22,  and  2  John  7. 


WHAT   ARE  "IDOLS"?  479 

of  Antlclirists.  He  is  warnincr  them  not  asrainst  gross 
idols  of  gold  and  jewels,  representing  deities  of  lust  and 
blood,  but  against  false,  jfleeting,  dangerous  images — 
idols  of  the  forum,  of  the  theatre,  of  the  cave ;  syste- 
matising  inferences  of  scholastic  theology;  theories  of 
self- vaunting  orthodoxy ;  semblances  under  which  we 
represent  God  which  in  no  wise  resemble  Him  ;  ever- 
widening  deductions  from  Scripture  grossly  misinter- 
preted ;  earthly  passions  and  earthly  desires  which  we 
put  in  the  place  of  Him ;  ideas  of  Him  which  loom 
upon  us  through  the  lurid  mists  of  earthly  fear  and 
earthly  hatred;  notions  of  Him  which  we  make  for 
ourselves,  which  are  not  He  ;  conceptions  of  Him  which 
we  have  derived  only  from  our  party-organ  or  our 
personal  conceit.  It  is  the  most  pregnant  of  all  warn- 
ings against  every  form  of  unfaithfulness  to  Grod ; 
against  violations  whether  of  the  First  or  of  the  Second 
Commandment ;  against  devotion  to  anything  which  is 
not  eternally  and  absolutely  true ;  against  perversions 
due  to  religionism  quite  as  much  as  against  open  rejec- 
tion of  God ;  against  the  tyrannous  shibboleths  of 
aggressive  systems  no  less  than  against  the  worship  of 
Belial  and  of  Mammon.  These  are  the  idols  which  in 
these  days  also  are  more  perilous  to  faith  and  holiness 
than  any  which  the  heathen  worshipped.  They  are 
dominant  in  sects  and  Churches  and  schools  of  thousfht. 
They  are  the  work,  not  of  men's  hands,  but  of  their 
imaginations.  They  have  mouths,  but  do  not  utter 
words  of  truth ;  they  have  eyes,  but  not  such  as  can 
gaze  on  the  true  light ;  they  have  hands,  but  they  do 
not  the  deeds  of  righteousness ;  feet  have  they,  but  only 
such  as  hurry  them  into  error.  "  They  that  make  them 
are  like  unto  them  ;  and   so  are  all  such  as  put  their 


480  THE   EARLY  DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

trust  in  them."  Little  children — all  who  love  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity  and  truth — all  who  know  that 
hatred  is  of  the  devil — all  who  have  recognised  that 
"  Love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law  " — little  children, 
keep  yourselves  from  idols  ! 


CHAPTER  XXXVI. 

THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    OF    ST.    JOHN. 

"  Amor  non  modo  verus  amor  est,  sed  veritate  evangelica  nititur." 

Bekgel. 

Apart  from  the  tratlis  inculcated  in  such  private 
Epistles  as  the  Second  and  Third  of  St.  John  and  that 
of  St.  Paul  to  Philemon,  it  is  a  happy  Providence 
which,  in  spite  of  their  brevity,  has  preserved  them  for 
us  during  so  many  hundred  years.  They  show  us  what 
grace  and  geniality  reigned  in  Christian  intercourse, 
and  how  much  there  was  in  this  sweet  communion  of 
saints  which  compensated,  even  on  earthly  grounds,  for 
the  loss  of  the  world's  selfish  friendships  and  seductive 
approbation.  The  love  of  the  brethren  more  than  counter- 
balanced the  hatred  of  the  enemies  of  Christ. 

That  these  little  letters  are  genuine  there  is  good 
reason  to  believe.  They  may  be  treated  together,  be- 
cause there  can  be  no  question  that  if  either  of  them  is 
genuine  both  of  them  are,  since  they  may  well  be 
described  as  "twin-sisters."^  Their  close  resemblance 
in  style,  phraseology,  and  tone  of  thought,  shows  that 
they  were  written  about  the  same  time,  and  by  the 
same  person.  Further  than  this,  they  agree  so  closely 
with  the  First  Epistle  that  if  they  were  written  by 
another  the  resemblance  could  only  be  accounted  for  by 
deliberate  imitation.     But  what  possible  ground  could 

1  Jcr.  Ep.  85. 
// 


482  THE  EARLY    DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

there  be  for  "  forging"  letters  so  slight  as  these, — letters 
which,  though  full  of  value,  do  not  add  a  single  essential 
thought  to  those  which  are  already  fully  expressed  and 
elaborated  in  the  other  writings  of  St.  John?  Their 
very  unimportance  for  any  doctrinal  purpose,  apart  from 
the  Gospel,  the  Apocalypse,  and  the  First  Epistle,  is  one 
of  the  proofs  that  no  faharius  would  have  thought  it 
worth  his  while  to  palm  them  off  upon  the  Church. 
Containing  no  conception  which  is  not  found  elsewhere, 
they  have  little  independent  dogmatic  value  ;  their  chief 
interest  lies  in  the  glimpse  which  they  give  us  of 
Christian  epistolary  intercourse  in  the  earliest  days. 

The  external  evidence  in  their  favour  is  even 
stronger  than  we  could  have  expected  in  the  case  of 
compositions  so  short,  so  casual,  and  so  unmarked  by 
special  features.  There  is  but  one  passage  (vss.  10, 
11)  in  the  Second  Epistle  which  can  be  quoted  as 
distinctive,  and  for  that  very  reason  it  is  the  one  to 
which  most  frequent  reference  is  made  ;  nor  is  there 
anything  which  specifically  characterises  the  Third 
except  the  allusions  to  Diotrephes  and  Demetrius. 
There  is  scarcely  a  single  expression  in  either  of 
these  letters  with  which  previous  writings  have  not 
already  made  us  familiar.  Indeed,  no  less  than  eight 
out  of  thirteen  verses  in  the  Second  Epistle  are  also 
to  be  found  in  the  First.  It  is  not,  therefore,  sur- 
prising that  they  only  became  known  gradually  to  the 
Church,  and  that  they  were  regarded  as  comparatively 
unimportant,  being  written  "  out  of  feelings  of  private 
affection,  thoucfh  to  the  honour  of  the  Catholic  Church."^ 

*  TLe  Muratoriau  Canon  says  of  the  Epistle  to  Philemon  and  the  two 
to  Timothy,  that  they  were  written  "  j>ro  affectu  et  dilectioue  in  honorem 
tameu  ecclesiae  catholicae." 


EXTERNAL  EYIDENCE.  483 

Yet  the  first  of  them  is  twice  quoted  by  Irenseus,^  and 
twice  referred  to  by  Clemens  of  Alexandria.^  Cyprian 
mentions  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Elect  Lady  (of  course 
the  passage  about  "heretics"),  was  quoted  by  one  of 
the  bishops  at  the  Council  of  Carthage.  The  testimony 
of  the  Muratorian  Canon  is  ambiguous,  owing  to  the 
corruption  of  the  text,  but  it  seems  to  tell  in  favour  of 
the  Epistles.^  The  Syrian  Church,  according  to  Cosmas 
Indicopleustes,  did  not  acknowledge  these  Epistles; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Second  Epistle  is  quoted  by 
Ephraem  the  Syrian.  Eusebius  and  Origen  seem  to 
have  regarded  the  Ejjistles  as  genuine,  though  they  rank 
them  among  the  disputed  books  of  the  canon— the  anti- 
legomena ;  as  also  does  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  the 
pseudo-Chrysostom,  and  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia.^  St. 
Jerome  says  that  there  were  many  who  assigned  them 
to  the  authorship  of  "  John  the  Presbyter ;  "  but  he 
seems    himself  to  have   accepted   them.^     The   notion 

^  Iren.  Baer.  iii.  16,  8  ;  i.  16,  3. 

2  Strom  ii.  15,  aud  Fragm.  p.  1011,  ed.  Potter  (but  comp.  Euseb. 
H.  E.  vi.  14) ;  Tert.  De  Praescr.  Haer.  33. 

^  See  Wieseler,  Studien  rmcl  Kritiken,  18-47,  p.  846.  Tlie  true  readiug 
and  punctuation  of  the  passage  seems  to  be  "  Epistolae  sane  Judae  et 
superscript!  Johannes  duae  [or  duas=5i/is,  "a  pair")  in  Catholica  habeutur." 
The  words  which  follow,  "  ut  Sapientia  ab  amicis  Salomonis  in  honorem 
ipsius  sci-ipta,"  must  then  be  referred  to  the  Apocal^'pse,  as  though  it  was 
written  by  friends  of  John,  as  Wisdom  by  friends  of  Solomon. 

*  ov  ira.vTis  (paa\  yv7}<Tlas  tlvai  ravras  (Orig.  cyj.  Euseb.  U.  E.  vi.  25  ; 
Dem.  Evang.  iii.  5) ;  elfre  rod  'E.hayyiXi<nov  Tvjx°'-^ov(rai,  ttre  Kal  erepov 
dficovvfiov  eKfivqj  (Euscb.  iii.  25) ;  (pepofievas  'laiauvou  (Diouys.  Alex.  rtj3.  Euseb. 
vdi.  25);  avriXijovrai  Se  al  Aonral  Svo  (Euseb.  iii.  24).  The  pseudo-Chrysos- 
tom  exaggerates  when  he  says  [Horn,  in  Matt.  xxi.  23),  "  the  Fathers  reject 
the  Second  and  Third  Epistles  from  the  Canon." 

*  "  Opinio  quam  a  plerisque  retulimus  traditam "  (Jer.  De  Virr. 
niustr.  9;  but  scei/p.  85).  Cosmas  Indicopleustes  rejects  all  the  Catholic 
Epistles,  but  his  remarks  about  tliem  {De  Mundo,  vii.  p.  292)  are  so  full 
of  errors  as  to  deserve  no  notice.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  in  his  Iambics, 
says — "  Of  the    Catholic  Epistles,  some  say  that  we  ought   to   receive 

//2 


484  THE  EARLY    DAYS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

that  they  were  written  by  "  John  the  Presbyter"  was 
revived  by  Erasmus  and  Grotius,  and  has  since  been 
maintained  by  some  modern  scholars.^  But,  as  I  have 
shown  in  the  Excursus,  there  never  was  such  a  person 
as  John  the  Presbyter  in  contradistinction  from  John 
the  Apostle.     The  two  were  one." 

We  see,  then,  that,  taken  in  connexion  with  the 
internal  evidence,  there  is  sufficient  ground  for  accepting 
these  little  Epistles.  There  is  no  difficult}^  in  the  fact 
that  St.  John  should  call  himself  "the  Elder"  and  not 
"the  Apostle."  The  dispute  as  to  who  was  and  who 
was  not  to  be  regarded  as  an  Apostle  had  long  since 
died  away.  St.  Paul  himself  does  not  always  care  to  use 
the  title.  He  drops  it,  for  instance,  in  addressing  those 
who,  like  the  Philippians  and  Philemon,  had  never  dis- 
puted his  apostolic  authority.  The  other  Apostles  were 
all  dead.  The  whole  Church  knew  that  St.  John  was  the 
last  survivor  of  the  Twelve.  He  may  have  called  himself 
"  the  Elder  "  out  of  humility ;  just  as  Peter,  in  address- 
ing the  elders,  calls  himself  their  "  fellow-elder."^  Or  he 
may  have  used  the  designation  because  he  belonged  to 
that  class  of  aged  Christians  to  whom,  at  this  time,  the 
younger  generation  which  was  springing  up  around  them 
often  appealed  under  the  name  of   "  the  Elders.*     Or, 

seven,  and  some  ouly  three — oue  of  James,  cue  of  Peter,  and  oue  of 
John — but  some  say  the  tliree  (of  John)." 

1  Dodwell,  Beck,  Fritzsclie,  Ebrard,  &c.  The  hitter  says  (1)  that  all 
resemblances  to  the  First  Epistle  vanish  if  2  John  5 — 6,  7,  and  3  John 
11  are  regarded  as  quotations;  and  (2)  that  it  is  inconceivable  that  the 
authorUy  of  an  Apostle  should  have  been  disputed  in  such  a  way  as  is 
described  in  3  John  9. 

2  See  Excursus  XIV.,  "  John  the  Apostle  and  John  the  Pres- 
byter." 

3  1  Pet.  V.  1,  <Tvfxirpe(T$vTfpos  ;    Philem.  9,  d  wpefffii'irVS- 

<  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  H9.  The  word  occurs  in  Irenpeus  and  other 
Johanuine  writers  in  quotations  from  the  Fathers  of  that  earlier  age. 


JOHN    THE    ELDER.  486 

again,  he  may  have  called  himself  "  the  Elder  "  because 
he  desired  to  claim  no  higher  authorit}'-  than  that  which 
accrued  to  him  from  his  great  age  and  long  experience.^ 
And  it  must  be  observed  that  he  calls  himself  "  the 
Elder,"  not  "  an  Elder."  There  were  hundreds  of  elders, 
and,  therefore,  by  calling  himself  "  the  Elder "  in  a 
pre-eminent  and  peculiar  sense,  he  at  once  marks  his  age 
and  authority.  The  phraseology,  the  style,  the  tone  of 
thought,  the  method  of  treatment  in  every  sentence, 
points  directly  to  the  authorship  of  the  Apostle.  The 
few  trivial  deviations  from  his  ordinary  expressions  only 
show  that  we  are  not  dealing  with  the  work  of  an 
elaborate  imitator.^ 

1.  There  has  always  been  great  doubt  as  to  the  des- 
tination of  the  Second  Epistle  of  St.  John.  Even  yet 
the  question  whether  it  was  addressed  to  a  lady  or  to  a 
Church  cannot  be  regarded  as  settled.  It  begins  with 
the  words,  "  the  Elder  unto  the  Elect  Lady  and  her 
children,  whom  I  love  in  the  truth ;  and  not  only  I,  but 
also  all  who  have  learnt  to  know  the  truth."  ^    Certainly 

^  It  is  in  exact  accordance  with  his  modest  self -withdrawal.  In  the 
Gospel  he  entirely  suppresses  his  own  name,  as  in  the  First  Epistle.  In 
the  Apocalypse  he  only  calls  himself  "  John."  So  far,  therefore,  the 
absence  of  any  lofty  title,  such  as  a  forger  might  have  given  him,  is  a 
mark  of  genuineness.  There  is  nothing  to  support  Ewald's  notion  that  it 
was  due  to  the  dangers  of  the  time. 

^  Such  ai"e  sj  rts  for  idv  rts  (2  John  10),  SiSaxhv  (pfpeiv,  iTfpiwaTftv  Kara, 
K0iva)V(7v,  fiet^orepav,  as  pointed  out  by  De  Wette.  To  dwell  on  the 
occurrence  of  a  few  phrases  whicli  he  liad  no  occasion  to  use  elsewhere 
(such  as  vyialfeiv,  (piKoirpwTevaiv,  (pAvapetv,  ■wpOTrefj.Trfiv  apices  tov  @eov),  is  idle. 

^  2  John  8  ;  'O  irpecr^vTepos  eK\eKT-p  Kupla  koI  to79  reKvois  avrrjs,  o'us  eyiii 
ayairS)  iv  aKrjdela,  k.t.k.  The  possible  renderings  are  (in  order  of  their 
possibility) — 

1.  To  an  elect  lady. 

2.  To  the  elect  lady. 

3.  To  the  elect  Kyria. 

4.  To  the  lady  Electa. 


486  THE    EARLY  DATS   OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

the  prima  facie  impression  created  by  the  words  would 
be  that  they  refer  to  a  lady.  In  that  case  the  omission 
of  the  article  seems  to  show  that  her  name  is  not  men- 
tioned. For  if  either  Electa  or  Kyria  had  been  her 
name,  then,  just  as  we  have  "  To  Gaius,  the  beloved," 
in  the  address  of  the  Third  Epistle,  we  should  naturally 
have  expected  here,  "  To  Ek^cta,  the  lady,"  or  "  To 
Kyria,  the  elect."  Nor  is  this  objection  adequately 
answered  by  saying  that  if  Kyria  was  the  lady's  name, 
the  article  might  have  been  omitted  by  an  unconscious 
analogy  of  the  use  of  the  word  Kurios,  "  the  Lord," 
without  an  article. 

a.  That  her  name  was  Electa  ^  is  asserted  in  the 
Latin  translation  of  the  fragments  of  Clemens  of  Alex- 
andria, where  he  says,  "  The  Second  Epistle  of  John, 
which  was  written  to  virgins,  is  very  simple ;  it  was, 
however,  written  to  a  Babylonian  lady,  by  name  Electa." 
It  may,  however,  be  regarded  as  certain  that  this  is  a 
mistake.  For  although  Electa  may  have  been  a  proper 
name  in  the  Christian  Church,  3'et  in  that  case  the 
meaning  of  verse  13  must  be,  "  The  children  of  thy 
sister  Electa  greet  thee  ;  "  and  it  is  highly  improbable 
that  bofh  sisters  bore  this  very  unusual  name. 

j3.  But  may  it  be  addressed  to  a  lady  named  Kyria  ?  ^ 
Kyria  was  a  female  name,  for  it  is  found  in  one  of  the 
inscriptions  recorded  in  Gruter  ;  ^  and  from  an  expression 
of  Athanasius,  "  he  is  writing  to  Kyria  and  her  chil- 
dren," it  has  been  inferred  that  this  was  his  view. 
It  is  a  possible  view  in  itself;   and  since   Kyria  may 

'  This  is  the  view  of  Lyra,  Grotius,  Wetstein. 

2  This  is  tlie   -vaow   of  Beugel,    Houmaiin,   Liicke,    De    Wotte,    and 
Diisterdieek. 

^  Gruter,  Inscript.  p.  1127,  "Pheuippus  auil  his  wife  Kyria." 


"THE    ELECT    LADY."  487 

be  the  Greek  equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  name  Martha, 
the  lady  may  have  been  a  Jewess.  This  view  also  gets 
over  the  difficulty  of  a  title  so  lofty  as  Kyria,  which,  ac- 
cording to  Bengel,  was  rarely  used  even  to  Queens/ 
But  the  objection  still  remains  that  we  should  then 
have  expected,  not  "  To  elect  Kyria,"  but  "  To  Kyria 
the  elect;  "  just  as  in  the  next  Epistle  we  do  not  find 
"  To  beloved  Gains,"  but  "  To  Gaius,  the  beloved." 

7-  But  if  we  must  render  the  words,  "To  an  elect 
Lady,"  are  we  to  understand  by  them  a  person  or  a 
Church  ? 

In  either  case,  the  person  or  the  Church  is  left  un- 
named. The  modern  view  seems  to  incline  in  favour  of 
a  Church.^  All  sorts  of  conjectures  have  been  made 
as  to  the  Church  intended,  and  the  most  far-fetched  and 
arbitrary  reasons  have  been  assigned  for  supposing  that 
it  was  addressed  to  the  Church  of  Corinth,^  or  of  Phila- 
delphia,'^ or  of  Jerusalem,  ^  or  of  Patmos,  or  of  Ephesus, 
or  of  Babylon.^ 

2.  The  latter  is  the  view  of  Bishop  Wordsworth. 
Starting  from  the  ambiguous  expression  of  1  Pet. 
v.  13,  "  the  co-elect  (77  o-we/cXe/cr?))  with  you  that  is  at 
Babylon   salute th   you,"  and  interpreting  it  to   mean 

^  See,  however,  the  following  note. 

2  So  Hofmaun,  Hilgenfeld,  Huther,  Ewald,  Wordsworth.  On  the 
other  hand,  Bengel,  Fritzsche,  De  Wette,  Lange,  Heumann,  Alford, 
Diisterdieck,  understand  a  person  to  be  addressed.  Epictetus  says  that 
"  women  from  the  age  of  fourteen  are  called  '  ladies '  («:vpiai)  by  men." 

^  Serrarius.  ■*  Winston. 

^  Whitby  and  Augusti. 

^  The  notion  of  St.  Jerome  {'E^.  xi.  ai,  Agei-uchiam)  that  it  was 
addressed  to  the  Church  in  general  (though  adopted  by  Hilgenfeld),  may 
be  at  once  dismissed.  Quoting  Cant.  vi.  9  as  referring  to  the  Church,  he 
adds,  "  to  which  John  writes  his  Epistle,  '  St.  John  to  an  Elect  Lady.'  " 
The  opinion  that  the  Lady  is  a  Church  is  mentioned  by  (Ecumenius, 
Theophylact,  and  Cassiodorus,  as  well  as  by  an  ancient  scholion. 


488  THE    EARLY  DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

the  Church  in  Babylon,  he  says  that  it  is  a  greeting  of 
the  Babylonian  Church  sent  through  St.  Peter  to  the 
Churches  of  Asia ;  and  he  supposes  that  the  verse,  "  the 
children  of  thy  sister,  the  elect  one,  greet  thee,"  is  a 
return  ^salutation  of  the  Churches  of  Asia,  through  St. 
John,  to  the  Church  of  Babylon.  He  thinks  that  this  is 
rendered  more  probable  by  the  close  relations  between 
St.  Peter  and  St.  John ;  and  he  finds  a  confirmation  of 
it  in  the  remark  of  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  that  the  letter 
is  addressed  "  to  a  Babylonian  lady,"  and  in  the  curious 
incidental  expression  in  the  title  of  St.  Augustine's  trac- 
tate on  the  Epistle,  "  Tractatus  in  Epistolam  Johannis 
ad  Pariho8.''  At  this  time,  he  says,  Babylon  was  under 
the  rule  of  the  Parthians,  and,  therefore,  a  letter  to 
the  Babylonian  Church  might  have  been  called  "  a  letter 
to  the  Parthians."  Further,  when  Clemens  says  that 
the  letter  was  written  "  to  Virgins,"  he  thinks  that  the 
Greek  word  '' parthenous "  was  only  a  corruption  of 
" Parthous."  Lastly,  he  adds  that  "there  would  be  a 
peculiar  interest  and  beauty  in  such  an  address  as  this 
from  St.  John  to  a  Church  at  Babylon,  which,  in  the 
days  of  her  heathen  pride,  had  been  called  '  the  Lady  of 
Kingdoms,'  and  had  said,  '  I  shall  be  a  Lady  for  ever.'  "  ^ 
Babylon  had  fallen ;  but  St.  Peter  had  preached  to 
Parthians,  among  others,  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost,^  and 
so  Babylon  had  arisen  again  in  Christ,  and  become  an 
elect  Lady  in  Him,  and  could  be  addressed  as  such  by 
the  Apostolic  brother  of  St.  Peter,  the  beloved  disciple 
St.  John. 

(i.)  I  must  confess  that  to  me  the  whole  theory  looks 
like  an  inverted  pyramid  of  inference  tottering  about 

^  Is.  xlvii.  5,  7  ;  '"i??:  <jevereth,  rendered  Kvpla  by  the  LXX.,  as  in  Gen. 
xvi.  4,  &c.  ^  Acts  ii.  9. 


"TO    THE    PARTHIANS."  489 

upon  its  extremely  narrow  apex.  The  phrase  of  St. 
Peter  is  of  most  uncertain  interpretation.  It  is  not 
certain  that  by  "  the  Co-elect "  he  means  a  Church. 
It  is  still  more  uncertain  that  by  Babylon  he  means 
Babylon  and  not  Eome.  We  may  say  of  the  very  basis 
on  which  the  theory  rests, — 

"  Nil  agit  exemplum  quod  litem  lite  resolvit." 

(ii.)  Then  the  theory  seems  to  imply  the  supposi- 
tion that  St.  John  had  at  some  time  left  Asia  and 
travelled  as  far  as  Babylon — a  journey  intrinsically 
improbable,  and  which  has  left  no  trace  in  any  tradi- 
tion of  the  Apostle.  In  ecclesiastical  legends  it  is  St. 
Thomas  and  not  St.  John  who  is  said  to  have  been  the 
Apostle  of  the  Parthians. 

(iii.)  Next,  the  vague  tradition  that  the  Epistle 
was  addressed  to  the  Parthians  is  devoid  of  even  the 
slightest  value,  for  it  is  more  than  doubtful  whether  the 
words  "  ad  Parthos  "  ever  stood  in  the  orifjinal  editions 
of  St.  Augustine's  Tractates ;  and  when  Bede  says  that 
it  was  the  opinion  of  St.  Athanasius  that  the  First 
Epistle  was  addressed  "  to  the  Parthians,"^  he  is  almost 
certainly  mistaken.  No  such  statement  is  found  in 
any  Greek  Father.  It  is  only  found,  according  to 
Grriesbach,  in  some  late  and  unimportant  Latin  Fathers, 
and  in  the  passage  of  St.  Augustine.^  Now  nothing 
can  be  more  improbable  than  that  the  First  Epistle 
was  addressed  to  the  Parthians,^  and  we  should  require 

1  Bede,  Prol.  ad  Ep.  Catliol.  (Cave,  Bist.  Litt.  i.  289). 

^  Aug.  Quaest.  Evang.  ii.  39.  "  Secundum  seutentiam  lianc  etiam 
illud  est  quod  dictum  est  a  Joaune  (1  John  iii.  2)  in  epistola  ad  Parthos.''' 
He  is  followed  by  the  Spaniard,  Idacius  Clarus.  nphs  ndpeovs  is  found  in 
superscriptions  of  the  Second  Epistle  in  some  late  cursive  manuscripts. 

^  Grotius,  Hammond,  and  others  accepted  this  view;  and  Paulus 
pressed  it  into  his  theories  about  the  Epistle. 


490  THE    EARLT  DATS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

much  stronger  evidence  than  this  isolated  allusion  of 
St.  Augustine  to  establish  the  fact.  We  are  driven 
to  suppose  that  "  ad  Parthos "  must  be  a  misreading. 
Serrarius  conjectures  that  it  should  be  "  ad  Pathmiosj" 
to  the  people  of  Patmos,  but  these  and  many  other 
conjectural  emendations  have  nothing  to  support  them.^ 
On  the  other  hand,  the  word  Parthos  may  have  arisen 
from  some  confusion  with  Parthenous,'  and  not,  as 
Bishop  Wordsworth  supposes,  the  latter  from  the 
former.  The  sweet  and  lofty  simplicity  of  the  First 
Epistle  may  have  led  someone  to  suggest  that  it  was 
written  to  Virgins — using:  the  word  in  the  sense  in 
which  it  occurs  in  the  Rev.  xiv.  4 — namely,  to  youthful 
and  uncorrupted  Christians.  And  this  suggestion  may 
have  derived  fresh  force  from  the  ancient  belief  that 
St.  John  himself  was  in  this  sense  "a  Virgin"  {par- 
thenos),^  a  title  which  is  actually  given  to  him  in  some 
superscriptions  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  elsewhere.'* 

3.  But  if  Bishop  Wordsworth's  suggestion  comes  to 
nothing,  what  are  we  to  say  of  the  theories  of  German 
critics  ?  The  remarks  of  Baur  respecting  this  Epistle 
exhibit,    almost    in    their    culmination,    the    arbitrary 

^  Semler  guesses  "  adapertius;"  Paulus  "ad  Pantas;"  and  Weg- 
scheider  irphs  tovs  SieiTirap(xa/j.eyovs,  ad  Sj^arsos  /  (see  Tholuek,  Introd.  p. 
32,  etseq.). 

2  So  Wliiston  conjectures.  For  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  in  his  Adum- 
brationes,  says  (in  a  very  confused  passage)  that  the  Second  Epistle  was 
written  "to  Virgins,"  which  is  manifestly  erroneous.  His  words  are — 
"  Secunda  Joaunis  epistola  quae  ad  Virgines  scripta  est,  siniplicissima  est ;  " 
tlieu  after  saying  that  it  is  written  to  a  certain  Babylonian  lady  named 
Electa,  he  adds,  "it  signifies,  howeyer,  the  election  of  the  Holy  Church." 

3  Gieseler,  Kirchengesch.  i.  p.  139. 

*  Tert.  de  Monogam.  c.  17;  Ps.-Iguat.  ad  Philad.  4:  Clem.  Alex. 
Orat.  de  Maria.  Virg.  p.  380.  In  a  cursive  manuscript  of  the  twelfth 
century  (30)  the  superscription  of  the  Apocalypse  runs  thus — "  Of  the 
holy,  most  glorious  apostle  and  evangelist,  the  Virgin,  the  beloved,  the 
bosom  Apostle  {iirtaTr)0(ov)  John,  the  Theologian." 


VAGUE    THEORIES.  491 

recklessness  of  conjecture  which  has  defaced  the 
usefulness  and  obliterated  the  existence  of  the  school 
of  Tubingen.  His  combinations  are  briefly  these : — 
Electa  is  a  Church ;  she  is  called  a  Babylonian  by 
St.  Clemens  to  indicate  the  Church  of  Eome ;  the 
Epistle  expresses  the  views  of  the  Montanists ;  Diotre- 
phes,  the  leader  of  the  anti-Montanist  section  of  the 
Church,  had  refused  to  hold  communion  with  them ; 
by  Diotrephes  is  meant,  not  "  Victor,"  as  Schwegler 
(by  a  demonstrable  anachronism^)  supposed,  but  perhaps 
Anicetus,  Soter,  or  Eleutheros,  The  writer  is  so  strong 
a  partisan  as  to  describe  the  faction  of  Diotrephes  as 
"heathens"-  (3  John,  7)! 

4.  Not  much  more  reasonable  is  the  notion  of  Hil- 
genfeld  that  the  Second  Epistle  was  sent  to  a  Church 
as  a  letter  of  excommunication  against  Gnostic  teachers, 
and  the  Third  as  a  letter  of  commendation  {iina-Tokr) 
ava-TdriKT])  to  Gaius,  issued  to  vindicate  against  Judaising 
Christians  the  right  of  St.  John  as  well  as  of 
St.  James  to  furnish  such  authorisations  to  travelling 
missionaries. 

5.  Nor  less  arbitrary  is  the  suggestion  of  Ewald  that 
both  the  Second  and  Third  Epistles  were  addressed 
to  one  Church  ;  that  it  must  have  been  an  important 
Church,  because  three  of  its  Elders — Diotrephes, 
Demetrius,  and  Gaius — are  mentioned ;  that  the  name 
of  the  Church  is  omitted  because  it  would  have  been 
dangerous  to  mention  it ;  and  that  the  Third  Epistle 
was  addressed  to  Gaius  from  a  misgiving  that  Diotre- 
phes might  suppress  the  first  letter,  and  prevent  it  from 
being  publicly  read  in  the  Church. 

^  For  this  Epistle  is  quoted  long  before  Victor's  day  by  Irenaeus  and 
Clemens  of  Alexandria.  '^  Baur,  Montanismus. 


492  THE    EARLY  DAYS  OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

Such  theories  are  not  worth  refuting.  They  might 
be  constructed  in  any  numbers.  They  are  mere  ropes 
of  sand,  which  fall  to  pieces  at  a  touch.  It  can  only  be 
regarded  as  a  misfortune  that  such  multitudes  of  them 
should  cumber,  with  their  useless  accumulations,  the 
whole  field  of  exegesis.  They  do  but  block  up  the  way 
to  any  real  advance  in  our  knowledge  of  the  history 
of  the  early  Church.  I  would  say  of  them  what  Baur 
says  of  certain  theories  of  apologists  :  "  It  is  not  worth 
while  to  discuss  vague  hypotheses  which  have  no  support 
in  history  and  no  cohesion  in  themselves."^ 

While  I  do  not  den}^  that  the  Elect  Lady  addressed 
may  have  been  a  Church,  it  does  not  seem  to  me  pro- 
bable. To  say  that  the  Church  is  symbolised  as  a 
woman  and  a  bride  in  the  Apocalypse,  is  to  adduce 
an  argument  which  bears  very  little  on  the  matter.'^ 
The  question  is  not  whether  a  Church  micjUi  not  be 
allegorically  called  "  a  Lady,"  which  every  one  admits, 
but  whether  it  is  natural  that,  in  a  short  and  simple 
letter,  St.  John  should,  from  first  to  last,  keep  up,  in 
this  one  particular,  an  elaborate  allegory,  and,  unlike  the 
other  Apostles,  address  a  Church  as  if  he  were  writing 
to  a  lady.  If  the  letter  were  playful  or  mystic,  such 
a  supposition  might  be  tolerable.  As  it  is,  unless 
there  be  some  unknown  factors  in  the  history  of 
the  circumstances  which  called  forth  the  letter,  it 
would  seem  to  savour  of  a  euphuism  unworthy  of  the 
great  Apostle,  and  alien  from  Apostolic  simplicity.  So 
far  as   I  am  aware,  there    is  not  another  instance  in 


1  Baur,  Ch..  Hist.  i.  131. 

2  Rev.  xii.  1 — 17  ;  xxi.  9.  To  say  tliat  'Ek\6kt7)  moans  "  a  Church  "  in 
Cant.  vi.  8,  tIj  avrri  (K\(KTi]  us  6  t^Kios,  is  to  pass  off  exegetical  fancies  as 
settled  truths. 


CHRISTIAN    WOMEN.  493 

Christian  literature,  whether  Greek  or  Latin,  whether 
in  apostolic  or  post-apostolic  times,  in  which  a  Church 
is  called  Kyria,  or  addressed  throughout  as  a  lady. 

6.  I  take  the  letter,  then,  in  its  natural  sense,  as 
having  been  addressed  to  a  Christian  lady  and  her 
children.  Some  of  those  children  the  Apostle 
seems  to  have  met  in  one  of  his  visits  of  supervision 
to  the  Churches  of  Asia.  They  may  have  been  on 
a  visit  to  some  of  their  cousins  in  a  neighbouring 
city,  and  St.  John — always  attracted  by  sympathy 
towards  the  young — finding  that  they  were  living 
as  faithful  Christian  lives,  writes  news  of  them  to  their 
mother,  whom  he  held  in  high  esteem ;  and  in  writing 
seizes  the  opportunity  to  add  some  words  of  Christian 
teaching.  That  St.  John  should  write  to  a  Christian 
lady  has  in  it  nothing  extraordinary.  Women  like 
Priscilla,  Lydia,  and  Phoebe  played  no  small  part  in 
the  early  spread  of  Christian  truth.  They  represented 
that  ennoblement  of  Christian  womanhood  which 
was  one  of  the  great  results  of  Christian  preaching; 
and  they  inspired  the  Apostles  with  a  warm  senti- 
ment of  affection  and  esteem.^  That  the  lady  should 
be  left  unnamed  is  in  accordance  with  the  feelings 
of  the  day.  It  was  against  the  common  feelings 
both  of  Jews  and  Grreeks  that  virtuous  matrons  should 
be  thrust  into  needless  prominence.  St.  Paul  indeed 
names  them  when  occasion  demands.  In  writing  to 
the  Philippians,  among  whom  women  occupied  a  more 
recognised  position  than  among  other  Poman  com- 
munities, he  makes  a  personal  appeal  to  the  two  ladies 
Euodias  and  Syntyche ;"    and   he   sends    salutations    to 

1  See  Acts  xvi.  14 ;  xviii.  2,  &e. ;  and  St.  Paul's  salutation  to  nine 
Christian  women,  in  Rom.  xvi.  ^  Phil.  iv.  2. 


494  THE    EARLY  DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

and  from  women  among  others.  Yet  he  never  wrote 
a  letter,  so  far  as  we  know,  even  to  Lydia  or  to 
Priscilla,  to  whom  he  was  so  much  indebted  ;  and  if 
he  had  written  such  a  letter — intended  (as  this  letter 
of  St.  John's  may  well  have  been)  for  perusal  by  all 
the  members  of  the  Church,  and  even  meant  to  be 
read  aloud  to  them  in  their  congregation — it  is  pro- 
bable that  he  would  have  left  the  name  unmentioned. 
Much  more  would  this  have  been  the  natural  feeling 
of  St.  John,  who  had  lived  most  of  his  life  in 
Jerusalem.  He  would  have  been  less  inclined  to 
infringe  on  the  seclusion  which  was  the  ordinary 
position  of  Eastern  womanhood,  because  his  experiences 
had  been  less  cosmopolitan  than  those  of  his  brother 
Apostles.  Who  the  Elect  Lady  was  we  do  not  know, 
and  never  shall  know.  To  suggest,  as  some  have 
done,  that  she  may  have  been  Martha  the  sister  of 
Lazarus,^  or  the  Mother  of  our  Lord,^  is  to  be  guilty 
of  the  idle  and  reprehensible  practice  of  suggesting 
theories  which  rest  on  the  air,  and  are  not  even 
worth  the  trouble  of  a  serious  refutation. 

Nor  is  there  anything  to  indicate  where  these  letters 
were  written.  They  may  have  been  sent  from  either 
Patmos  or  Ephesus,  Eusebius  says  that  they  were 
written  at  Ephesus  before  a  tour  of  pastoral  visitation.^ 

The  analysis  of  the  letter  is  extremely  simple. 
After  a  kindly  greeting  (1 — 3),  he  tell  this  Christian 
matron  of  his  joy  in  finding  that  some  of  her  children 
(whom  he  had  chanced  to  encounter)  were  walking 
in  the  truth  (4).     He  enforces  on  her  the  commandment 

^  Carpzov.  Martba=Kup^a. 

«  Kiiauer,  Stiul.  u.  Krit.  1833. 

3  Eusob.  H.  E.  iii.  23. 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE.  495 

of  Christian  love,  which  is  both  new  and  old  (5,  6)  ; 
warns  her  against  dangerous  antichristian  teachers 
(7 — 9),  to  whose  errors  she  is  not  to  lend  the  sanction 
of  her  hospitality  or  countenance  (10,  11),  and 
concludes  with  the  expression  of  a  hope  that  he 
may  soon  visit  her  and  her  family,  and  with  a  greeting 
from  the  children  of  her  Christian  sister  (12,  13). 
The  keynotes  of  the  Epistle,  as  indicated  by  its  most 
prominent  words,  are  Truth  and  Love.  Truth  occurs 
five  times  and  Love  four  times  in  these  few  verses. 

"  Tlie  Elder  to  the  elect  Lady  ^  and  her  children  whom  I  love  in 
Truth,2  and  not  I  alone,  but  also  all  who  have  learnt  to  know  the 
Truth,^  because  of  the  Truth  which  abideth  in  us,  and  shall  be  with 
us  for  ever.*  Grace,  mercy,  peace,*  shall  be  with  us"  from  God  our 
Father,  and  from  Jesus  Christ  the  Son  of  the  Father,  in  Truth  and 
Love. 

"  I  rejoice'^  greatly  because  I  have  found  some  of  thy  children** 
walking  in  Truth,  even  as  we  received  commandment  from  the 
Father. 

^    Comp.  iK\(KTo7s  7rapeirtSr]ixois,  1  Pet.  i.  1. 

2  Truth  is  here  used  in  the  Joliannine  sense — the  realm  of  eternal 
reality.     "  Whom  I  love  in  the  truth  of  the  Gospel." 

3  It  has  been  thought  that  this  expression  is  too  wide  to  apply  to  a 
single  person,  but  it  merely  means  that  all  Christians  who  know  the 
character  of  the  lady  and  her  children  love  her. 

*  Comp.  John  xiv.  16,  17. 

^  "  Yotum  cum  affirmatione  "  (Bengel).  A  wish,  with  the  assurance 
that  it  will  be  fulfilled. 

^  For  the  full  meaning  of  this  triple  greeting  see  my  Life  and  fVorJc  of 
St.  Paul,  ii.  516.  "  Grace  "  refers  to  man's  sin ;  "  mercy  "  to  his  misery ; 
"  peace  "  is  the  total  result  to  both ;  and  all  three  work  in  the  region  of 
truth  and  love.  "  Gratia  tolUt  culpam  misericordia  miseriam,  pax  dicit 
permansionem  in  gratia  ex  misericordia  "  (Bengel). 

^  Lit.  "I  rejoiced,"  but  it  is  the  epistolary  aorist.  "  Avcte,  filii  et 
filiae,  in  nomine  Domini  nostri  Christi  in  pace ;  supra  modum  exhilaror 
boatis  et  praeclaris  spiritibus  vestris  "  (Ps.-Barnab.  Ep.  \.). 

*  Kiav,  3  John  3.  This  does  not  of  course  necessarily  imply  that 
some  were  not  so  walking.  Probably  St.  John  had  only  met  some  of 
them. 


496  THE    EARLY  DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

*'  And  nowi  I  entreat  thee,  Lady,  not  as  writing  to  thee  a  new 
commandment,  but  that  which  we  had  from  the  beginning,2  that  we 
love  one  another.  And  this  is  love,  that  we  should  walk  according  to 
His  commandments.3  This  is  the  commandment,  even  as  ye  heard 
from  the  beginning,  that  ye  should  walk  in  it.  Because  many 
deceivers  went  forth*  into  the  world,  such  as  confess  not  Jesus 
Christ  coming  in  the  flesh. ^  This  is  the  deceiver  and  the  Antichrist. 
Take  heed  to  yourselves  that  ye  lose  not  what  we  have  wrought,''  but 
that  ye  receive  a  full  reward.  Every  one  who  goeth  forward^  and 
abideth  not  in  the  teaching  of  the  Christ,  hath  not  God.  He  who 
abideth  in  the  teaching,  he  hath  both  the  Father  and  the  Son.  If 
any  one  cometh  to  you/  and  bringeth  not  this  doctrine,  receive  him 
not  into  your  house,  and  bid  him  not  'good  speed.'  For  he  who 
biddeth  him  '  good  speed '  partakes  in  his  evil  deeds.9 

"  Having  many  things  to  write  to  you,  I  prefer'"  not  to  do  so  by 

1  The  words  mark  a  transitiou,  as  in  1  John  ii.  28,  ipuru>.  See  on  1 
John  V.  16.     "  Blaudior  quaedam  admoueudi  ratio  "  (Schlichting). 

2  See  ou  1  John  ii.  7,  8 ;  iii.  11. 

^  The  same  identification  of  love  with  obedience  which  we  have  found 
in  1  John  ii.  6 — 10,  &c.  Praxis,  not  gnosis,  is  the  true  test  of  faithful 
discipleship. 

*  i^riAdof,  a,  A,  B,  Syriac,  Vulgate,  Irenaeus.  Not  "  came  in,"  the 
reading  adopted  by  our  E.  V.     Corap.  1  John  ii.  18,  22 ;  iv.  1 — 3. 

^  The  present  participle  is  used  to  make  the  expression  as  general  as 
possible.  They  denied  the  possibility  of  the  Incarnation.  See  1  John  ii. 
18,  22 ;  iv.  2  ;  V.  6.     They  seem  to  have  been  Docetic  Gnostics. 

•»  The  readings  vary  greatly  between  the  first  and  second  persons. 
Matt.  ix.  37  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  1.5 ;  John  vi.  29.  The  loss  wliieh  takes  off 
from  the  full  reward  is  explained,  in  the  next  verse,  to  be  separation 
from  God. 

^  The  true  reading  is  not  "  who  transgressetli "  (wapafiaivwu),  but 
Trpodycov,  a.  A,  B,  Vulg.  Not,  as  some  commentators  here  hint,  as  though 
all  progress  in  Christian  thought  was  a  crime,  and  incapacity  to 
advance  beyond  stei-eotyped  prejudice  a  virtue,  but  referring  either  (1) 
to  advance  in  ivrong  directions,  or  (2)  to  Christian  teachers  who  go  before 
tlieir  fiocks  (John  x.  4  ;  Mark  x.  32). 

**  The  indicative  following  et,  implies  that  such  loill  come.  He  is  not 
of  course  thinking  of  heathens,  but  of  Christian  false  prophets. 

^  See  l)elow.  The  meaning  of  course  is  that  we  are  not  to  give  to 
fundamental  heresy  an  appearance  of  approval  by  pronouncing  the  deeper 
fraternal  greeting.  In  some  versions  are  here  interpolated  the  words, 
"  Ecce  praedixi  vobis  ne  in  diem  domiui  condemnemiui." 

1°  Epistolary  aorist 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE.  407 

paper  and  ink,'  but  I  hope  to  come  to  you,-  and  to  speak  mouth  to 
mouth, 3  that  your  joy  may  be  fulfilled.*  The  children  of  thy  elect 
sister  greet  thee."^ 

It  will  be  seen,  then,  at  a  glance,  that  Truth  and 
Love  are  keynotes  of  the  Epistle,  and  that  the  con- 
ceptions which  prevail  throughout  it  are  those  with 
which  we  have  been  made  familiar  by  the  previous 
E23istle.  And  yet  one  passage  of  the  Epistle  has  again 
and  again  been  belauded,  and  is  again  and  again  adduced 
as  a  stronghold  of  intolerance,  an  excuse  for  pitiless 
hostility  against  all  who  differ  from  ourselves.^  There 
is  something  distressing  in  the  swift  instinct  with  which 
an  unchristian  egotism  has  first  assumed  its  own  infalli- 
bility on  subjects  which  are  often  no  part  of  Christian 
faith,  and  then  has  sped  as  on  vulture's  wings  to 
this  passage  as  a  consecration  of  the  feelings  with 
which  the  ocli/on  tlieolof/icum  disgraces  and  ruins  the 
Divinest  interests  of  the  cause  of  Christ.  It  must  be 
said — though  I  say  it  with  the  deepest  sorrow — that 

^  If  the  letter  was  Avi-itten  at  Patmos,  these  materials  might  not  readily 
1)0  procui'able.  The  word  x°-p'^vs,  means  Egyptian  papyrus.  For  the 
manner  in  which  it  was  prepared,  see  Pliny,  H.  N.  xiii.  21.  The  ink  was 
made  of  soot  and  water,  mixed  with  gum. 

2  yeueadai  irphs  iifxas.     The  same  Greek  construction  as  in  John  vi.  25. 

3  A  Hebraism,  r^^■bH  ns  (Jer.  xxxii.  4;  3  John  14). 
*  1  Jolm  i.  4. 

^  '■  Sua^-issima  communitas  !  comitas  Apostoli  minorum  verbis  salutem 
nunciantis  "  (Bengel).  It  is  impossible  to  say  why  the  sister  herself 
sends  no  greetings.  "We  can  hardly  sup^jose  that  she  was  dead,  because 
she  is  called  "  thy  elect  sister."  But  we  may  suggest  a  score  of  hypotheses 
wliich  would  suffice  to  explain  the  circumstance.  Bengel  says,  "  Hos 
liberos  (ver.  4)  in  domo  matcrterae  eorum  invenerat." 

"  Thus  on  the  strength  of  this  text  John  a  Lasco,  ]ia\ang  been  expelled 
from  England  during  the  I'eign  of  Mary  in  1553,  was,  with  his  congrega- 
tion, refused  admission  into  Denmark  (Salig.  Hist.  Conf.  Ang.  ii.  lOUO ; 
tpioted  by  Braune  ad  loc.  in  Lange's  Blbelwerk).  Thus  by  tlie  manipula- 
tion of  a  few  phrases  Hate  is  made  to  wear  the  guise  of  Love,  and  Fury 
to  pose  as  Christian  meeknose. 


498  THE    EARLY  DAYS    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

the  cold  exclusiveness  of  the  Pharisee,  the  bitter 
ignorance  of  the  self-styled  theologian,  the  usurped  in- 
fallibility of  the  half-educated  religionist,  have  ever 
been  the  curse  of  Christianity.  They  have  imposed 
"  the  senses  of  men  upon  the  Avords  of  God,  the  special 
senses  of  men  on  the  general  words  of  God,"  and  have 
tried  to  enforce  them  on  all  men's  consciences  with  all 
kinds  of  burnings  and  anathemas,  under  equal  threats 
of  death  and  damnation.^  And  thus  they  have  in- 
curred the  terrible  responsibility  of  presenting  religion 
to  mankind  in  a  false  and  repellent  guise.  Is  theo- 
logical hatred  still  to  be  a  proverb  for  the  world's  just 
contempt?  Is  such  hatred — hatred  in  its  bitterest 
and  most  ruthless  form — to  be  regarded  as  the  legiti- 
mate and  normal  outcome  of  the  religion  of  love  ?  Is 
the  spirit  of  peace  never  to  be  brought  to  bear  on 
religious  opinions  ?  Are  such  questions  always  to 
excite  the  most  intense  animosities  and  the  most  terrible 
divisions  ?  Is  the  Diotrephes  of  each  little  religious 
clique  to  be  the  ideal  of  a  Christian  character?  Is  it 
in  religious  discussions  alone  that  impartiality  is  to  be 
set  down  as  weakness,  and  courtesy  as  treason  ?  Is  it 
among  those  only  who  pride  themselves  on  being  "  or- 
thodox "  that  there  is  to  be  the  completest  absence  of 
humility  and  of  justice?  Is  the  vi^orld  to  be  for  ever 
confirmed  in  its  opinion  that  theological  partisans  are 
less  truthful,  less  candid,  less  high-minded,  less  honour- 
able even  than  the  partisans  of  political  and  social 
causes  who  make  no  profession  as  to  the  duty  of  love  ? 
Are  the  so-called  "  religious  "  champions  to  be  for  ever, 
as  they  now  are,  in  many  instances,  the  most  unscrupu- 
lously bitter  and  the  most  conspicuousl}'^  unfair?     Alas  ! 

1  Cliillingworth. 


RELIGIOUS    HATRED.  499 

they  might  be  so  with  far  less  danger  to  the  cause  of 
religion  if  they  would  forego  the  luxury  of  "  quoting 
Scripture  for  their  purpose."  The  harm  which  has  thus 
been  done  is  incredible  : — 

"  Crime  was  ne'er  so  black 
As  ghostly  cheer  and  pious  tlianks  to  lack. 
Satan  is  modest.     At  Heaven's  door  he  lays 
His  evil  offspring,  and  in  Scriptural  phrase 
And  saintly  posture  gives  to  God  the  praise 
And  honour  of  his  monstrous  progeny." 

If  this  passage  of  St.  John  had  indeed  authorised 
such  errors  and  excesses — if  it  had  indeed  been  a  proof, 
as  has  been  said,  of  "  the  deplorable  growth  of  dogmatic 
intolerance  "  ^ — it  would  have  been  hard  to  separate  it 
from  the  old  spirit  of  rigorism  and  passion  which  led 
the  Apostle,  in  his  most  undeveloped  days,  to  incur  his 
Lord's  rebuke,  by  proclaiming  his  jealousy  of  those  who 
worked  on  different  lines  from  his  own,  and  by  wishing 
to  call  down  fire  to  consume  the  rude  villagers  of  Samaria. 
It  would  have  required  some  ingenuity  not  to  see  in  it 
the  same  sort  of  impatient  and  unworthy  intolerance 
which  once  marked  his  impetuous  outbursts,  but  which 
is  (I  trust  falsely)  attributed  to  him  in  the  silly  story  of 
Cerinthus  and  the  bath.  In  that  case  also  the  spirit  of 
his  advice  would  have  been  widely  different  from  the 
spirit  which  actuated  the  merciful  tolerance  of  the  Lord 
to  Heathens,  to  Samaritans,  to  Sadducees,  and  even  to 
Pharisees.  It  would  have  been  in  direct  antagonism 
to  our  Lord's  command  to  the  Twelve  to  salute  with 
their  blessing  every  house  to  which  they  came,  because 

^  So  Renan,  in  his  article  on  tho  Fourth  Gospel  in  the  Contemp.  Rev. 
Sept.  1877. 


500  THE    EARLY  DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

if  it  were  not  worthy  their  peace  would  return  to  them 
again. ^  It  would  have  been  alien  from  many  of  the 
noblest  lessons  of  the  New  Testament.  It  would 
practically  have  excluded  from  the  bosom  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  of  Christianity  alone,  the  highest  workings 
of  the  universal  law  of  love.  It  would  have  been  in 
glaring  disaccord  with  the  gentleness  and  moderation 
which  is  now  shown,  even  towards  absolute  unbelievers, 
by  the  wisest,  gentlest,  and  most  Christlike  of  God's 
saints.  If  it  really  bore  the  sense  which  has  been 
assigned  to  it,  it  would  be  a  grave  reason  for  sharing 
the  ancient  doubts  respecting  the  genuineness  of  the 
little  letter  in  which  it  occurs,  and  for  coming  to  the 
conclusion  that,  while  its  general  sentiments  v^ere  bor- 
rowed from  the  authentic  works  of  St.  John,  they  had 
only  been  thrown  together  for  the  purpose  of  intro- 
ducing, under  the  sanction  of  his  name,  a  precept  of 
unchristian  harshness  and  religious  intolerance. 

But   there  is  too  much  reason  to  fear  that  to  the 
end  of  time  the  conceit  of  orthodoxism  will  claim  in- 

J  It  is  said  that  Polycavp  was  ouce  accosted  hj  Marcioii,  aud  asked  by 
him,  "  Dost  tliou  not  kuow  me  ?"  "Yes,"  he  answered,  "I  know  thee, 
tlie  firstborn  of  Satan"  (Iren.  c.  Ilaer.  iii.  3;  Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  14).  "So 
cautious,"  adds  Irenaeus,  "  were  the  Apostles  aud  their  followers  to  have  no 
commmiication — no,  not  so  much  as  in  discourse — ^^dth  those  who  adulte- 
rated the  truth."  The  story,  as  might  have  been  expected,  is  told  by 
other  ecclesiastical  writers  with  intense  gusto,  down  to  modern  days. 
But  even  if  it  be  true,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  the  exami)le  was 
estimable.  St.  Polycarp  was  just  as  liable  to  sin  and  error  as  other 
saints  have  been.  We  have  no  right  to  treat  any  man  with  rude  dis- 
courtesy. If  to  be  a  Christian  is  to  act  as  Christ  acted,  then  Polycarp's 
discourtesy  was  unchristian.  Pharisees  openly  rejected  our  Lord,  yet  He 
even  accepted  their  invitations,  and  told  His  Disciples  to  show  them 
honour.  Is  a  heretic  so  much  worse  than  a  heathen,  that  a  Christian 
wife  might  live  witli  a  heathen  husband  (1  Cor.  Ani.  12,  13),  while  yet 
a  Christian  might  not  even  speak  without  the  grossest  rudeness  to  a 
Gnostic  teacher  F 


RELIGIOUS    HATRED.  501 

spired  authority  for  its  own  conclusions,  even  when  they 
are  most  antichristian,  and  will  build  up  systems  of  ex- 
clusive hatred  out  of  inferences  purely  unwarrantable. 
It  is  certain,  too,  that  each  sect  is  always  tempted 
to  be  proudest  of  its  most  sectarian  peculiarities ; 
that  each  form  of  dissent,  whether  in  or  out  of  the 
body  of  the  Established  Churches,  most  idolises  its 
own  dissidence.  The  aim  of  religious  opinionativeness 
always  has  been,  and  always  will  be,  to  regard  its 
narrowest  conclusions  as  matters  of  faith,  and  to  exclude 
or  excommunicate  all  those  who  reject  or  modify  them. 
The  sort  of  syllogisms  used  by  these  enemies  of  the 
love  of  Christ  are  much  as  follows : — 

''My  opinions  are  founded  on  interpretations  of 
Scripture.  Scripture  is  infallible.  My  views  of  its 
meaning  are  infallible  too.  Your  opinions  and  infer- 
ences differ  from  mine,  therefore  you  must  be  in  the 
wrong.  All  wrong  opinions  are  capable  of  so  many 
ramifications  that  any  one  who  differs  from  me  in  minor 
points  must  be  unsound  in  vital  matters  also.  There- 
fore, all  who  differ  from  me  and  my  clique  are  '  heretics.' 
All  heresy  is  wicked.  All  heretics  are  necessarily 
wicked  men.  It  is  my  religious  duty  to  hate,  calum- 
niate, and  abuse  you." 

Those  who  have  gone  thus  far  in  elevating  Hatred 
into  a  Christian  virtue  ought  logically  to  go  a  little 
farther.  They  generally  do  so  when  they  have  the  power. 
They  do  not  openly  say,  "  Let  us  venerate  the  examples 
of  Arnold  of  Citeaux,  and  of  Torquemada.  Let  us 
glorify  the  Crusaders  at  Beziers.  Let  us  revive  the 
racks  and  thumbscrews  of  the  Inquisition.  Let  us,  with 
the  Pope,  strike  medals  in  honour  of  the  massacre  of 
St.  Bartholmew.    Let  us  re-establish  the  Star  Chamber, 


502  THE   EARLY    DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

and  entrust  those  ecclesiastics  who  hold  our  opinions 
with  powers  of  torture."  But,  since  they  are  robbed  of 
these  means  of  securing  unanimit}' — since  the}^  can  no 
longer  even  imprison  "dissenting  tinkers"  like  Bunyan 
and  "  regicide  Arians  "  like  Milton — they  are  too  apt  to 
indulge  in  the  party  spirit  which  can  employ  slander 
though  it  is  robbed  of  the  thumbscrew,  and  revel  in 
depreciation  though  it  may  no  longer  avail  itself  of  the 
fagot  and  the  rack. 

The  tender  mercies  of  contending  religionists  are 
excejDtionally  cruel.  The  men  who,  in  the  Corinthian 
party-sense,  boast  "  I  am  of  Christ,"  do  not  often,  in 
these  days,  formulate  the  defence  of  their  lack  of  charity 
so  clearly  as  this.  But  they  continually  act  and  write 
in  this  spirit.  Long  experience  has  made  mankind 
familiar  with  the  base  ingenuity  which  frames  charges 
of  constructive  heresy  out  of  the  most  innocent  opinions  ; 
which  insinuates  that  variations  from  the  vulgrar  exesresis 
furnish  a  sufficient  excuse  for  banding  anathemas,  under 
the  plea  that  they  are  an  implicit  denial  of  Christ  ! 
Had  there  been  in  Scripture  any  sanction  for  this 
execrable  spirit  of  heresy-hunting  Pharisaism,  Chris- 
tian theology  would  only  become  another  name  for  the 
collisions  of  wrangling  sects,  all  cordially  hating  each 
other,  and  only  kept  together  by  common  repulsion 
against  external  enmity.  But,  to  me  at  least,  it  seems 
that  the  world  has  never  developed  a  more  unchristian 
and  antichristian  phenomenon  than  the  conduct  of 
those  who  encourage  the  bitterest  excesses  of  hatred 
under  the  profession  of  Christian  love.^  I  know  nothing 
so  profoundly  irreligious  as  the  narrow  intolerance  of 
an    ignorant  dogmatism.      Had    there   been   anything 

^  1  John  iii.  10,  11. 


RELIGIOUS    HATRED.  503 

in  this  passage  which  sanctioned  so  odious  a  spirit,  I 
could  not  have  believed  that  it  emanated  from  St.  John. 
A  good  tree  does  not  bring  forth  corrupt  fruit.  The 
sweet  fountain  of  Christianity  cannot  send  forth  the  salt 
and  bitter  water  of  fierceness  and  hate.  The  Apostle  of 
love  would  have  belied  all  that  is  best  in  his  own 
teaching  if  he  had  consciously  given  an  absolution, 
nay,  an  incentive,  to  furious  intolerance.  The  hist  words 
of  Christian  revelation  could  never  have  meant  what 
these  words  have  been  interpreted  to  mean — namely, 
"  Hate,  exclude,  anathematise,  persecute,  treat  as  enemies 
and  opponents  to  be  crushed  and  insulted,  those  who 
differ  from  you  in  religious  opinions."  Those  who  have 
pretended  a  Scriptural  sanction  for  such  Cain-like  reli- 
gionism have  generally  put  their  theories  into  practice 
against  men  who  have  been  infinitely  more  in  the  right, 
and  transcendently  nearer  Grod,  than  those  who,  in 
killing  or  injuring  them,  ignorantly  thought  that  they 
were  doing  Grod  service. 

Meanwhile  this  incidental  expression  of  St.  John's 
brief  letter  will  not  lend  itself  to  these  gross  perver- 
sions. What  St.  John  really  says,  and  really  means,  is 
something  wholly  different.  False  teachers  were  rife, 
who,  professing  to  be  Christians,  robbed  the  nature  of 
Christ  of  all  which  gave  its  efficacy  to  the  Atonement, 
and  its  significance  to  the  Incarnation.  These  teachers, 
like  other  Christian  missionaries,  travelled  from  city  to 
city,  and,  in  the  absence  of  public  inns,  were  received 
into  the  houses  of  Christian  converts.  The  Christian 
lady  to  whom  St.  John  writes  is  warned  that,  if  she 
offers  her  hospitality  to  these  dangerous  emissaries  who 
were  subverting  the  central  truth  of  Christianity,  she  is 
expressing  a  public  sanction  of  them ;  and,  by  doing 


504  THE    EARLY    DAYS    OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

this  and  offering  tliem  lier  best  wishes,  she  is  taking 
a  direct  share  in  the  harm  they  do.  This  is  common 
sense ;  nor  is  tliere  anything  uncharitable  in  it.  Xo 
one  is  bound  to  help  forward  the  dissemination  of 
teaching  what  he  regards  as  erroneous  respecting  the 
most  essential  doctrines  of  his  own  faith.  Still  less 
would  it  have  been  right  to  do  this  in  the  da3's  when 
Christian  communities  were  so  small  and  weak.  But 
to  interpret  this  as  it  has  in  all  ages  been  practi- 
cally interpreted — to  pervert  it  into  a  sort  of  command 
to  exaggerate  the  minor  variations  between  religious 
opinions,  and  to  persecute  those  whose  views  differ  from 
our  own — to  make  our  own  opinion  the  exclusive  test 
of  heresy,  and  to  say,  with  Cornelius  a  Lapide,  that 
this  verse  reprobates  "  all  conversation,  all  intercourse, 
all  dealings  with  heretics  " — ^is  to  interpret  Scripture  by 
the  glare  of  partisanship  and  spiritual  self-satisfaction, 
not  to  read  it  under  the  light  of  holy  love. 

Alas  !  churchmen  and  theologians  have  found  it  a 
far  more  easy  and  agreeable  matter  to  obey  their  dis- 
tortion of  this  supposed  command,  and  even  to  push  its 
stringency  to  the  very  farthest  limits,  than  to  obey  the 
command  that  we  should  love  one  another !  From  the 
Tree  of  delusive  knowledge  they  pluck  the  poisonous 
and  inflating  fruits  of  pride  and  hatred,  while  they  suffer 
the  fruits  of  love  and  meekness  to  fall  neglected  from 
the  Tree  of  Life.  The  popularit}''  which  these  verses 
still  enjoy,  aiid  the  exaggerated  misinterpretations  still 
attached  to  them,  are  due  to  the  fact  that  they  are 
so  acceptable  to  the  arrogance  and  selfishness,  the  dis- 
honesty and  tyranny,  the  sloth  and  obstinacy,  of  that 
bitter  spirit  of  religious  discord  which  has  been  the 
disgrace  of  the  Church  and  the  scandal  of  the  world. 


CHAPTER  XXXVII. 

THE    THIRD    EPISTLE    OF    ST.    JOHN. 

"  Ex  operibus  cognoscitm*  valetudo  animae,  et  liaiic  prosequuntur  vota 
Sanctorum." — Bengel. 

Nothing  can  be  ascertained  respecting  the  Gains  to 
whom  this  letter  is  addressed,  beyond  what  the  letter 
itself  implies — that  he  was  a  faithful  and  kind-hearted 
Christian.  I  have  already  explained  that,  from  the 
circumstances  of  the  time,  hospitality  to  Christian 
teachers  was  a  necessary  duty,  without  which  the 
preaching  of  Christianity  could  hardly  have  been 
carried  on.^  Gains,  like  his  namesake  at  Corinth,^  and 
like  Philemon,^  distinguished  himself  by  the  cheerful- 
ness with  which  he  performed  this  duty.  It  could  not 
always  have  been  an  easy  or  an  agreeable  duty,  for 
some  of  the  Christian  emissaries,  and  especially  those 
from  Jerusalem,  seem,  according  to  the  testimony  of 
St.  Paul,  to  have  behaved  with  an  insolence  and  rapacity 
truly  outrageous.*  But  those  to  whom  Gains  opened 
his  hospitable  house  were  not  of  this  character.  They 
were  men  who  had  followed  the  noble  initiative  of 
St.  Paul,  and  who  refused  to  receive  anything  from  the 
Gentiles  to  whom  they  preached. 

Some,  from  the  identity  of  name  and  character,  have 

1  Hence  the  importance  attached  to  it  (Rom.  xii.  13 ;    1  Tim.  iii.  2 ; 
Tit.  i.  8;  Heb.  xiii.  2 ;  1  Pet.  iv.  9). 
-  Rom.  xvi.  23 ;  1  Cor.  i.  14. 
3  Pliilem.  7.  *  2  Cor.  xi.  20. 


506  THE    EARLY  DAYS   OF   CHRISTIANITY. 

assumed  that  the  Gaius  here  addressed  must  have 
been  the  Gaius  of  Corinth.  Such  an  inference  is  most 
precarious.  Gaius  was,  perhaps,  the  commonest  of  all 
names  current  throughout  the  Roman  Empire.  So 
common  was  it  that  it  was  selected  in  the  Roman  law- 
books to  serve  the  familiar  purpose  of  John  Doe  and 
Richard  Roe  in  our  own  legal  formularies.  It  no  more 
serves  to  identify  the  hearer  of  the  name  than  if  it  had 

been  addressed  "  To  the  well-beloved ,"   for  Gaius 

was  colloquially  used  for  "  so-and-so."^  There  are  at 
least  three  Gaiuses  in  the  New  Testament — Gaius  of 
Macedonia  (Acts  xix.  29),  Gaius  of  Corinth  (Rom.  xvi. 
23),  and  Gaius  of  Derbe  (Acts  xx.  4).  A  Gaius  is 
mentioned  in  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  (vii.  40),  as 
Bishop  of  Pergamum,  and  it  is  not  impossible  that  this 
may  be  the  person  here  addressed. 

The  main  object  of  the  letter  was  to  encourage  him 
in  his  course  of  Christian  faithfulness,  and  to  contrast 
his  conduct  with  that  of  the  domineering  Diotrephes. 
Diotrephes,  in  his  ambition,  his  arbitrariness,  his  arro- 
gance, his  tendency  to  the  idle  babble  of  controversy, 
and  his  fondness  for  excommunicating  his  opponents, 
furnishes  us  with  a  very  ancient  specimen  of  a  character 
extremely  familiar  in  the  annals  of  ecclesiasticism.^ 
There  is  something  astonishing  in  the  notion  that  the 
prominent  Christian  Presbyter  of  an  Asiatic  Church 
should  not  only  repudiate  the  authority  of  St.  John,  and 
not  only  refuse  to  receive  his  travelling  missionary,  and 
to  prevent  others  from  doing  so,  but  should  even  excom- 
municate or  try  to  excommunicate  those  who  did  so ! 

'  Renan,  in  Contemp.  liev.  Sept.  1877. 

2  Hymenaous,  Alexander  (1  Tim.  i.  20),  Philetus  (2  Tim.  ii.  17), 
Hermogenes,  and  Pliygellus  (2  Tim.  i.  18)  are  similarly  mentioned  as 
opponents  of  St.  Paul. 


THE    THIRD    EPISTLE.  507 

But  we  must  leave  the  difficulty  where  it  is,  since  we 
are  unable  to  throw  any  light  upon  it.  The  condition 
of  the  Church  of  Corinth,  as  St.  Paul  described  it, 
leaves  us  prepared  for  the  existence  of  almost  any 
irregularities.  The  history  of  the  Church  of  Christ, 
from  the  earliest  down  to  the  latest  days,  teems  with 
subjects  for  perplexity  and  surprise. 

"  The  Elder  to  Gaius  the  beloved,  whom  I  love  in  Truth. ^ 
''  Beloved,  I  pray  that  in  all  respects-  thou  may  est  prosper,'  and 
be  in  health,*  even  as  thy  soul  prospereth.  For  I  rejoice  exceedingly 
at  the  arrival  of  brethren  who  bear  witness  to  thy  Truth,  even  as 
thou  walkest  in  Truth.  I  have  no  greater^  joy  than  this,  that  I  hear 
of  my  children  walking  in  the  Truth." 

"  Beloved,  thou  playest  a  faithful  part  in  all  thy  work  towards 
the  brethren,  and  even  to  strangers, '^  who  bear  witness  to  thy  love 
before  the  Church,  whom  by  forwarding  on  their  journey*  worthily  of 
God^  thou  wilt  do  well.    For  on  the  Name's  behalf^"  they  went  forth, 

1  1  John  iii.  18 ;  2  John  i.  To  love  "  in  Truth,"  is  the  same  as  to 
love  "  in  the  Lord." 

2  Not  "above  all  things,"  as  in  E.  V.  That  meaning  of  Trepl  irdyrav  is 
only  found  in  classical  poetry. 

^  evoSovc-eai  (Rom.  i.  10 ;  1  Cor.  xii.  2);  literally,  to  be  "guided  on  a 
journey."  Philo  uses  the  word  as  here,  both  of  bodyaud  soul,  Quis  Rer. 
Dlv.  Haer.  §  58. 

■*  vyiaivfiv  was  not  among  Christians  as  it  was  among  Stoics,  a  common 
form  of  address.  Hence  we  must  assume  that  Gaius  suffered  from  ill- 
health. 

»  The  doubled  comparative  im^oripav  may  be  intentionally  emphatic, 
like  eAaxfCTf^repos,  in  Eph.  iii.  8,  "  Est  ad  intendendam  significationem 
comparativus  e  comparativo  factus  "  (Grotius). 

**  'Iva.  St.  John's  use  of  tVa  is  far  wider  than  that  of  classical  writers. 
It  often  loses  its  telic  sense  ("  in  order  that"),  and  becomes  simply  eJcbatic, 
or  explanatory,  as  in  Luke  i.  43,  Jolm  xv.  13. 

'^  Kal  TovTo,  M,  A,  B,  C.  The  hospitality  of  Gaius  was  not  only  <pi\aSe\((>ia, 

but   (piKo^evla. 

^   irpon(/u.\pas.      Tit.  iii.  13. 

^  a^icos  Tov  Qeov.  That  is,  giving  them  the  maximum  of  help,  as  their 
sacred  cause  deserves.     (Comp.  1  Thess.  ii.  12;  Col.  i.  10.) 

^"  Acts  V.  41 ;  ix.  16,  &c. ;  Pliil.  ii.  9.  "  I  have  been  bound  in  the 
Name  "   (Ignat.  ad  Ephes.  3).     "  Some  are  wont  with  evil  guile  to  carry 


508  THE    EARLY   DAYS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

accepting  nothing  from  the  Gentiles.^  We  then  ought  to  support  such, 
that  we  may  become  fellow-workers  with  the  Truth.^ 

''I  wrote  somewhat  to  the  Church/'  but  their  domineering  Dio- 
tre])hes  rcceiveth  us  not.*  On  this  account,  if  I  come,  I  will  bring  to 
mind*  his  deeds  which  he  doeth,  with  wicked  words  battling  against 
us  ;  ®  and  not  content  with  that,  he  neither  himself  receives  the 
l)rethren,  and  he  hinders  those  who  wish  to  do  so,  and  expels  them 
from  the  Church.'' 

"  Beloved,  do  not  imitate  the  evil  but  the  good.®  He  that  doeth 
good  is  from  God  :  he  that  doeth  evil  hath  not  seen  God.^     Witness 

about  the  Name,  while  they  are  doing  deeds  unworthy  of  God"  {id.  ib.  7). 
Similarly  Christians,  among  themselves,  spoke  of  Christianity  as  "the 
way  "  (Acts  ix.  2;  xix.  9). 

1  St.  Paid's  rule  (1  Thess.  ii.  9;  1  Cor.  ix.  18;  2  Cor.  xi.  7;  xii.  16). 
Gentiles  must  of  course  mean,  "  Gentile  converts."  They  could  not 
expect  the  heathens  to  support  them.  This  is  perhaps  implied  by  the 
adjective  iBviKuv,  «,  A,  B,  C. 

-  Comp.  1  Thess.  iii.  2 ;  Col.  iv.  11. 

*  Eindently  a  brief  letter,  from  the  expression  n,  m,  A,  B,  C  (Luke 
vii.  40;  Acts  xxiii.  18).  It  is  now  lost,  like  many  other  of  these  minor 
communications  (1  Cor.  v.  9).  Diotrephes  seems  to  have  suppressed  this 
letter,  whatever  it  was.  If  lie  could  behave  so  outrageously  as  he  is  said 
to  do  in  the  next  clause,  he  would  have  thought  but  little  of  making  away 
with  a  brief  letter. 

■*  That  is,  "  rejects  my  authority."  Perhaps  it  means  that  this  turbu- 
lent intriguer  refused  to  acknowledge  St.  John's  "  commendatory  letter." 

^  John  xiv.  26.  St.  John  means  that  he  will  draw  the  attention  of  the 
Church  to  the  proceedings  of  Diotreplies. 

"  (pKvapol  (1  Tim.  V.  13);  (pXvapilv,  the  French  deblaierer.  "Apposite, 
ealumnias  Diotrepliis  vocat  garritjim"  (Corn,  a  Lapide). 

^  These  proceedings  seem  so  A'ory  liigh-hauded,  that  we  might  take  the 
words  to  mean  merely  that  he  excluded  tliem  from  the  congregation  which 
possibly  met  at  his  house ;  or  we  might  suppose  the  meanings  of  the 
presents  to  be  "  tries  to  hinder  them,  and  wants  to  excommunicate  them." 
Certainly  the  present  often  implies  the  unsuccessful  conatus  rei  perfi- 
ciendae  (see  my  Brief  Greek  Syntax,  §  136) ;  but  we  know  too  little  of 
Diotrephes,  and  of  the  Church  in  which  he  had  so  nmch  influence,  to  bo 
al)le  to  say  that  he  might  not  liave  actually  excommimicated  (as  unau- 
thorised interlopers  into  his  pari.sh — schismatic  intruders  on  Jiis  own 
autliority)  those  who  gave  liospitality  to  Evangelists  or  wlio  brought 
•■  letters  of  commendation  "  from  St.  John.  If  he  was  capable  of  prating 
against  St.  John,  he  might  have  l)eeu  capable  of  tliis  also. 

*  Heb.  xiii.  7 ;  1  Pet.  iii.  13.  rh  KaKhv  in  Diotroplie  ;  rh  ayaOhv  ia 
Demetrio"  (Beugel).  »  1  John  iii.  6—10;  iv.  8. 


THE    THIRD    EPISTLE.  509 

has  been  bonie  to  Demetrius  by  all/  and  by  the  Truth  itself  ;  aye,  and 
we  too2  bear  witness,  and  thou  knowest  that  our  witness  is  true.3 

"  I  had  many  things  to  write  to  thee,  but  I  do  not  wish  by  ink 
and  reed^  to  write  to  thee,  but  I  hope  immediately  to  see  thee,  and 
we  will  speak  mouth  to  mouth.  Peace  to  thee.^  The  friends  salute 
thee.     Salute  the  friends  by  name."6 

"  Salute  the  friends  hij  name!'  Salute  each  of  our 
Cliristian  friends  as  warmly  and  as  individually  as 
thougli  I  liad  here  written  down  their  names.  So  fitly 
ends  the  last  of  the  writings  of  St.  John.  The  close  of 
his  messages  to  the  Church  of  God  is  as  calm  and  gentle 
as  the  close  of  his  life.  God  cares  for  individuals,  and 
therefore  the  Church  of  God  cares  for  them  also.  They 
may  he  obscure,  humble,  faulty ;  but  if  they  be  true 
disciples  they  need  fear  nothing  which  the  world  can 
threaten,  and  desire  nothing  which  it  can  offer,  for 
"their  names  are  written  in  the  Book  of  Life."  The 
aged  Apostle  speaks  of  them  as  "  friends."  The  name, 
as  applied  to  Christians,  is  peculiar  to  him,  for  Chris- 
tians regarded  each  other  as  "  brethren,"  and  therefore 
as  bound  together  by  a  tie  even  closer  than  that  of 
friendship.  But  if  he  uses  this  word  as  well  as 
"brethren"  and  "beloved,"  it  doubtless  is  from  the 
remembrance  of  what  he  alone  among  the  Evangelists 
has  recorded,  that  the  Lord  Jesus  had  called  Lazarus 
"  His   friend,"    and   that   He   had  said,  "  Ye    are    my 

1  "  Demetrius  was  possibly  the  bearer  of  the  letter  "  (Liicke). 

^  KoX  r]/xe7s  Se  (1  John  iii.  6). 

^  John  V.  32  ;  xxi.  24. 

*  The  Kd\a/j.os  is  a  split  reed.  St.  John  seems  to  have  d  sliked  the 
physical  toil  of  writing,  to  which  it  is  quite  possible  that  he  had  not  been 
accustomed.     He  probably  dictated  his  longer  and  more  important  works. 

^  John  xix.  28.  '*  The  inward  peace  of  conscience,  the  fraternal  peace 
of  friendship,  the  heavenly  peace  of  glory  "  (Lyra). 

^  The  allusion  is  to  ^lersonal  private  friends,  not  the  brethren  'u 
general. 


510  THE    EARLY    DATS   OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

friends,  if  ye  do  the  things  which  I  command  you.  No 
longer  do  I  call  you  servants,  for  the  servant  knoweth 
not  what  his  Lord  doeth ;  but  I  have  called  you  friends, 
for  all  things  that  I  have  heard  from  my  Father  I  have 
made  known  unto  you." 

He  ends,  therefore,  fitly  with  this  kind  message  to 
individual  friends.  And  after  this  we  know  nothing 
more  with  certainty  respecting  him.  He  was  not  taken 
to  Heaven  in  the  fiery  chariot  of  glory  or  of  martyrdom, 
but  in  all  probability  he  died  at  Ephesus,  in  a  peaceful 
and  honoured  age,  among  many  friends  who  deeply 
loved  and  greatly  honoured  him.  And  the  last  murmur 
of  tradition  which  reaches  us  respecting  him  is  that 
which  tells  us  of  his  last  exhortation.  When  he  was  no 
longer  a  "  Son  of  Thunder,"  no  longer  even  an  "  Eagle 
of  Christ  " — when  he  was  a  weak  and  worn  old  man, 
with  scarcely  anything  left  him  but  a  feeble  voice  and 
trembling  hands,  he  still  uplifted  those  trembling  hands 
to  bless,  and  still  strove  to  sum  up  all  that  he  had 
taught,  in  words  easy  to  utter,  but  of  which,  after  so 
many  centuries,  we  have  yet  so  imperfectly  learnt  the 
meaning — 

"Filioli,  diligite  alterutrum." 

"  Little  children,  love  one  another." 

And  this  he  did,  as  he  himself  explained,  "  because  such 
was  the  Lord's  command ;  and  if  tliis  only  be  done,  it  is 
enough." 


APPENDIX. 

EXCUESUS    I. 

THE    ASSERTED    PRIMACY    OF    ST.    PETER. 

That  St.  Peter  was  a  leading  Apostle — in  some 
respects  the  leading  Apostle — none  will  dispute ;  but 
that  he  never  exercised  the  supremacy  w^iich  is  assigned 
to  him  by  Eoman  Catholic  writers  is  demonstrable  even 
from  the  New  Testament.  Anyone  who  will  examine  the 
list  of  twenty-eight  Petrine  prerogatives  detailed  by 
Baronius^  will  see  in  their  extreme  futility  the  best 
disproof  of  the  claims  of  Roman  primacy.  St.  Peter 
had,  as  Cave  says,  a  primacy  of  order,  but  not  a  supre- 
macy of  power.  Such  a  supremacy  our  Lord  emphati- 
cally discountenanced."  In  his  Epistle  St.  Peter  does 
not  assume  the  title  of  Apostle,  but  only  calls  him- 
self a  fellow-presbyter,  and  rebukes  all  attempts  "  to 
play  the  lord  over  the  heritage  of  Grod."  The  other 
Apostles  send  him  to  Samaria.  The  Church  at  Jeru- 
salem indignantly  calls  him  to  account  for  the  bold  step 
which  he  had  taken  in  the  case  of  Cornelius.  Paul,  at 
Antioch,  withstands  him  to  the  face,  and  claims  to  be 
no  whit  inferior  to  the  very  chiefest  Apostle,  assuming 
the  Apostolate  of  the  TJncircumcision — that  is,  of  the 

^  De  Bom.  Pontif,  i.  17,  scqq. 

*  Matt.  XX.  25—27  ;  Luke  xxii.  24r— 26. 


512  APPENDIX. 

whole  Gentile  world — as  predominantly  liis  own.  St. 
Peter  was  not  specially  "  tlie  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved ; " 
and  though  he  received  from  his  Lord  some  of  the  highest 
euloffiums,  he  also  incurred  the  severest  rebukes.  Even 
when  we  turn  to  the  Fathers,  we  find  St.  Cyprian  saying 
that  "the  rest  of  the  Apostles  were  that  which  Peter 
was ;  endowed  with  equal  participation  both  of  honour 
and  of  power."  ^  The  Presbyter  Hesychius  calls,  not  St. 
Peter,  but  St.  James, '  the  prince  of  priests,  the  leader  of 
the  Apostles,  the  crown  among  the  heads,  the  brightest 
amonsr  the  stars."  ^  He  calls  St.  Andrew  "  the  Peter 
before  Peter."  St.  Cyril  says  that  Peter  and  John  had 
equivalent  honour.  The  Promise  of  the  Keys  was  given 
to  all  the  Apostles  alike  ; ''  and  in  the  Apocalypse  no 
distinction  is  made  between  Kephas  and  the  rest  of  the 
Twelve.'*  Origen  says  that  all  who  make  Peter's  con- 
fession with  Peter's  faithfulness  shall  have  Peter's 
blessing.^  He  was  eminent  among  the  Apostles ; — 
supreme  he  never  was.^ 


EXCUliSUS    II. 

PATRISTIC    EVIDENCE    ON    ST.    PETER's    VISIT    TO    ROME. 

St.   Clemens  of  Pome  (f   101)  says  that  "he  bore 
witness,"  using  the  term  which  implies  his  martyrdom  ;' 

1  De  Unitat.  Eccles.  p.  180. 

^  Ap.  Pilot.  Cod.  275.      XlfTpos  5Tj|Urj7ope?  d\\'  'laKu^os  vofioBereT. 
3  Matt,  xviii.  17,  18;  Jolm  xx.  21—23. 
••  Rev.  xxi.  It. 
*  In  Matt.  xvi. 

•>  See  the  question  examined  in  Shepherd's  Hist,  of  the  Ch.  of  Rome. 
pp.  494,  /. 

"  Ep.  ad  Cor.  v. 


ST.    PETER    AT    ROME.  513 

but  he  does  not  say  that  this  took  place  at  Rome. 
Ignatius  (f  114)/  and  Papias^  (referred  to  by  Eusebius, 
t  340),  use  language  which  may  be  inferentially  pressed 
into  the  implication  that  he  had  been  at  Eome.  St. 
Clemens  of  Alexandria  (f  220),  who  tells  the  story  about 
St.  Peter's  wife,  does  not  mention  Pome.^  St.  Diony- 
sius  of  Corinth  (f  165),  says  that  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul 
both  taught  in  Italy  ;*  but  the  weight  of  even  this  slight 
allusion  is  neutralised  by  its  being  found  in  the  same 
sentence  with  the  erroneous  suggestion  that  Peter  had  a 
share  in  the  founding  {(^vreiav)  of  the  Church  of  Corinth. 
St.  Irenseus  (f  202)  makes  the  dubious  statement,  that 
both  Apostles  took  part  in  the  appointment  of  Linus 
to  be  Bishop  of  Rome.^  Gains  (f  200),  as  quoted  by 
Eusebius,  says  that  the  "  trophies"  of  the  Apostles  were 
shown  at  Pome  in  his  days.^  Tertullian  (f  218)  makes 
a  similar  remark  in  a  passage  where  he  also  accepts 
the  legend  of  St.  John's  escape  from  death  when  he  was 
plunged  into  a  caldron  of  boiling  oil  at  the  Latin  gate.'' 
Lastly,  Origen  (f  254)  is  the  first  who  says  that  Peter 
was  "  crucified  head  downwards  ; "  ^  and  St.  Ambrose — or 
a  pseudo-Ambrose — tells  the  story  of  the  Vision  on  the 
Appian  road.  Later  allusions  to  the  Apostle's  connexion 
with  Rome,  which  grow  more  definite  as  time  advances, 

^   Ignat.  Ep.  ad  Rom.  iv  ;   ohx  ^s  TliTpos  koI  nav\os  SiaTaa-ffofiai  vfuv. 

^  Papias  ap.  Euseb.  11.  E.  iii.  ad  fin.  But  the  inference  is  of  the 
remotest  kind.  It  supposes  that  St.  Peter  needed  Mark  as  his  "  interpreter  " 
in  Latin. 

^  Clem.  Alex.  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  vi. 

*  Dion.  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  25. 

•''  Iren.  c.  Haer.  iii.  1  and  3,  and  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  6. 

®  Gains,  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  25. 

^  Tert.  de  Praesc.  Hner.  32,  36.     See  too  Scorpiace,  15. 

^  Orig.  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  1  ;  aveffKoXotriadrj  Kara  Ke<paKris  outois  avTos 
a^idiras  nadety. 

h    h 


614  APPENDIX. 

are  found  in  Arnobius,^  in  Lactantius,^  in  the  Apostolical 
Co?isfitiiliu?isj^  and  in  the  pseudo-Clementine  Homilies} 

St.  Peter's  visit  to  Eome  is  of  course  testified  by 
multitudes  of  later  writers  ;  but  their  assertions  have 
no  independent  or  evidential  value. ^ 


EXCUESUS    III. 

USE  OF  THE  NAME  BABYL0:N  FOR  ROME  IN  1  PET.  V.  13. 

It  has  been  asserted  that  St.  Peter  could  not 
be  writing  from  the  real  Babylon,  because  that 
city  was  at  this  period  ruined  and  deserted.  Strabo 
and  Pausanias  say  that  it  was  a  mere  ruin ;  Pliny 
calls    it    a    solitude.^     But,  although   we    learn    from 

'  Arnob.  c.  Gent.  ii.  12.  ^  Lactant.  de  Mort.  Persec.  ii. 

'  Const.  Apost.  vii.  45.  ''  Ps.-Clem.  Horn.  Ep.  ad  Jac.  1. 

^  The  denial,  that  St.  Peter  was  ever  at  Rome,  by  the  Waldenses, 
Marsilius  of  Padua,  Salmasius,  &c.,  was  elaborately  supjwrted  by  Fr.  Spann- 
heim  {De  ficta  profectione,  etc.,  1679).  De  Wette,  Baiir,  Wiuer,  Holtz- 
luami,  and  Schwegler  are  led  to  a  similar  view  by  their  belief  in  the 
virulent  jealousies  between  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians,  and  Neander 
was  shaken  by  tiie  arguments  of  Baur.  But  the  mass  of  learned  Pro- 
testants, Scaliger,  Casaubon,  Grotius,  Usher,  Bramhall,  Pearson,  Cave, 
Schrockh,  Gieseler,  Bleek,  Olshausen,  Wieseler,  Hilgenfeld,  etc.,  to  a 
greater  or  less  degree,  admit  his  martyrdom  or  residence  at  Rome.  To 
enter  into  a  discussion  of  the  Papal  claims  is  here  wholly  beyond  my 
scope.  If  the  reader  has  any  doubt  on  the  subject,  he  may  read  with 
advantage  the  articles  on  the  "  Petrino  Claims,"  in  the  Cinirch  Quar- 
terly Review  for  April,  1878,  April,  1879.  and  January,  1880,  and  he  will 
find  some  brief  hints  on  the  subject  in  Dr.  Littledale's  Plain  Reasons. 
He  will  find  all  that  can  be  urged  on  the  other  side  in  Mr.  Allnatt's 
Cathedra  Petri  and  Father  Ryder's  Catholic  Controversy. 

"  See  Is.  xiii. ;  xiv.  4,  12;  xhd.,  etc.  That  the  Babylon  alluded  to  is 
the  obscure  Egyjjtian  fort  of  that  name  (Strabo,  xvii.  1,  p.  807) — a  place 
utterly  unknown  to  Christian  history  and  tradition — is  a  conjecture  which 
may  be  set  aside  without  further  notice.  No  human  being  in  the  Asiatic 
Churches  to  which  St.  Peter  was  writing  could  ever  have  heard  of  such 
a  place. 


"  BABYLON."  515 

Josephns  that  tlie  Jews  in  the  city  had  terribly  suffered, 
first  by  a  persecution  in  the  reign  of  Caligula,  and 
then  by  a  plague,^  we  have  no  reason  to  believe  that 
many  of  them  may  not  have  returned  during  the 
twenty  years  which  had  subsequently  elapsed.  Again, 
it  is  not  proved  that  St.  Peter  may  not  have  used 
the  word  "  Babylon "  to  describe  the  comilry  or 
(Usfrict,  as  is  done  by  Philo,^  so  that  he  may  have 
actually  written  from  Seleucia  or  Ctesiphon,  in  which 
cities  the  Jews  were  numerous;^  or  even  from  Nehardea 
or  Nisibis,  in  which  they  had  taken  refuge.*  Parthians, 
Medes,  Elamites,  and  dwellers  in  Mesopotamia,  had  been 
among  his  hearers  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  there 
is  nothing  intriiisically  improbable  in  the  notion  of  his 
having  gone  to  visit  these  crowded  communities  of  the 
Dispersion.  They  were  so  numerous  and  so  important, 
that  Josephus  originally  wrote  his  History  of  the 
Jeiuish  War  for  their  benefit,  and  wrote  it  in  Aramaic, 
without  any  doubt  that  it  would  find  countless  readers. 

It  has  been  argued  that  the  geographical  order 
observable  in  the  names  "  Pontus,  Galatia,  Cappadocia, 
Asia,  and  Bithynia "  —  the  Churches  to  which  his 
Epistle  is  addressed — is  more  natural  to  one  writing 
from  Babylon  than  to  one  who  was  writing  from 
Rome  ;  but  this  is  an  argument  which  will  not  stand  a 
moment's  consideration. 

On  the  other  hand,  against  the  literal  acceptance 
of  the  word  "  Babylon  "  there  are  four  powerful  argu- 
ments. (1).  There  is  not  the  faintest  tradition  in  those 
regions  of  any  visit  from  St.  Peter.  (2).  If  St.  Peter  was 
in  Babylon  at  the  time  when  his  Epistle  was  written, 

'  Jos.  Ardt.  xviii.  9,  §  8.  "-  Pliilo,  Leg.  ad  Gaium,  36. 

^  Jos.  Antt.  XV.  3,  1.  ■*  Jos.  Antt.  xviii.  9,  §  9. 

//    h  2 


516  APPENDIX. 

there  is  great  difficulty  in  accounting  for  his  familiarity 
with  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  which  was  not  written 
till  A.D.  63.  (3).  It  becomes  difficult  to  imagine  cir- 
cumstances which  could  have  broufjht  him  from  the  far 
East  into  the  very  crisis  of  the  Neronian  persecution  in 
the  Babylon  of  the  West.  (4).  If  "Marcus"  be  the 
Evangelist,  he  was  with  St.  Paul  between  a.d.  61 — 63/ 
and  probably  rejoined  him  just  before  his  martyrdom  in 
A.u.  68.-  We  should  not,  therefore,  expect  to  find  him 
so  far  away  as  Babylon  in  a.d.  67. 

I  strongly  incline  to  the  belief  that  by  Bab3don  the 
Apostle  intended  to  indicate  Eome,^  and  we  find  this 
interpretation  current  in  the  Church  in  very  early  days.* 
The  Apocalypse  was  written  about  the  same  time  as — 
or  not  long  after — the  First  Epistle  of  St.  Peter ;  and 
in  the  Apocalypse'^  and  in  the  Sibylline  Verses^  we  see 
that  a  Western,  and  even  an  Asiatic,  Christian,  when  he 
heard  the  name  "  Babylon "  in  a  religious  writing, 
would  be  likely  at  once  to  think  of  Eome.  Throughout 
the  Talmud  we  find  the  same  practice  of  applying 
symbolic  names.  There  Rome  figures  under  the 
designations  of  Nineveh,  Edom,  and  Babylon,  and 
almost  every  allusion  to  Christ,  even  in  the  un- 
expurgated  passages  of  the  Amsterdam  edition,  is 
veiled  under  the  names  of  "Absalom,"  "That  man," 
"  So-and-so,"    and    "  The    Hung."      The    reference  to 

'  Col.  ivr.  10 ;  Philem.  24. 

2  2  Tim.  iv.  11. 

^  So  the  Fathers  unanimously ;  and  Grotius,  Lardner,  Cave,  Semler, 
Hitzip^,  and  the  Tiibingen  school ;  as  against  De  Wette  and  Wieseler. 
See  too  Lipsius,  Chron.  der  Bom.  Bisch.  (1869) ;  Hilgenfeld,  Petrus  in 
Bom.  (Zeitschr.f.  woss.  Theol.  1872);  Zollor,  Zur  Petrusfrage  {ib.  1876). 

*  Papias,  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iL  16,  iii.  25 ;  Iron.  c.  Haei:  iii.  1,  &e. 

*  Rev.  x.iv.  8 ;  xvi.  19 ;  xvii.  9,  18  ;  xviii.  2,  etc. 
6  Sibyll.  V.  143,  159. 


-BABYLON."  517 

Home  as  Babylon  may  have  originated  in  a  mystic 
application  of  the  Old  Testament  prophecies,  but  it  had 
its  advantage  afterwards  as  a  secret  symbol.  It  is 
therefore  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  the  use  of  Babylon 
for  Eome  would  be  the  sudden  obtrusion  of  "  allegory  " 
into  matter-of-fact,  or  that  by  using  it  the  Apostle 
would  be  "  going  out  of  his  way  to  make  an  enigma  for 
all  future  readers."  There  is,  in  fact,  a  marked 
accordance  between  such  an  expression  and  the  con- 
ception which  St.  Peter  indicates  throughout  his  letter, 
that  all  Christians  are  exiles  scattered  from  the  heavenly 
Jerusalem,  living,  some  of  them,  in  the  earthly  Babylon.^ 
An  early  Christian  would  have  seen  nothing  either 
allegorical  or  enigmatical  in  the  matter.  He  would  at 
once  have  understood  the  meaning,  and  have  known 
the  reasons,  alike  mystic  and  pohtical,  for  avoiding  the 
name  of  Rome. 


EXCURSUS  IV. 

THE    BOOK    OF    ENOCH. 


The  quotation  from  the  Book  of  Enoch  by  St.  Jude, 
and  the  traces  which  it  contains  of  the  reciprocal  in- 
fluences of  Jewish  and  Christian  speculation,  have  always 
attracted  the  attention  of  the  Church  to  that  singular 
Apocalypse. 

From  the  end  of  the  16th  century  till  recent  times 
nothing  was  known  of  it  except  by  the  quotations  in 
the  Fathers  and  the  Greek  fragments  preserved  in  the 
Ghronof/raphia   of    Georgius   Syncellus,    and  the   Testa- 

^  1   Pet.   i.   1,    Tra.pfmhiiiJ.ois ;   V.   13,   iv  Bafiv\ci>vi.     See   Godet's  New 
Testarnent  Studies. 


518  APPENDIX. 

ment  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs.  In  tlie  17th  century  it 
became  known  that  the  enth-e  book  existed  in  an 
Ethiopic  translation.  Three  manuscripts  of  this  trans- 
lation were  brought  to  England  by  Bruce,  the  Abys- 
sinian explorer,  in  1773.  It  was  first  translated  into 
English  by  Archbishop  Lawrence  in  1821,  and  retrans- 
lated into  Grerman  by  Hofmann  in  1833,  and  into  Latin 
by  A.  E.  Gfrorerin  1840. 

It  consists  of  an  Introduction,  i. — vi.  12,  containing 
a  Prophecy  of  Judgment. 

vii. — X.  Legends  about  the  two  hundred  fallen 
angels  who  went  astray  with  the  daughters  of  men, 
and  taught  mankind  the  Arts,  the  Sciences,  and  many 
forms  of  luxury. 

xi. — xvi.  Enoch  is  sent  on  a  mission  to  these  fallen 
angels. 

xvii. — XXXV.  Visions,  sometimes  (as  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse) in  Heaven  and  sometimes  on  earth,  in  which 
Enoch  is  taught  the  origin  of  the  elements  and  the 
general  elements  of  Natural  Science,  and  is  shown  the 
prison  of  the  fallen  angels,  and  the  dwelling  of  the 
good,  where  the  voice  of  the  murdered  Abel  sounds. 

xxxvii. — Ixx.^  A  second  "  Vision  of  Wisdom,"  which 
(as  in  the  Apocalypse)  repeats — •though  with  many 
variations — all  the  essential  elements  contained  in 
i. — XXXV.,  which  are  treated  as  one  vision.  This 
section  falls  into  three  Parables  or  Maschals ;  these 
are  xxxviii. — xliv.,  chiefly  dwelling  on  the  future  abode 
and  condition  of  sinners  ;  xlv. — Iv.,  on  those  who  deny 
Heaven  and  God,  and  the  Messianic  Judgment  which 
they  incur;  Ivi. — Ixx.,  chiefly  on  the  blessings  of  the 
elect. 

^  Chapter  xxxvi.  is  missing. 


THE    BOOK    OF    ENOCH.  519 

The  secfcioa  Ixxi. — Ixxxi.  is  entitled  the  Book  of 
the  Lights  of  Heaven.  Enoch,  orally  and  in  writing, 
teaches  his  son  Methuselah  about  the  sun,  moon,  and 
stars. 

The  section  Ixxxii. — Ixxxix.  contains  two  dreams. 
In  the  first  Enoch  sees  the  vision  of  the  Flood,  and 
prays  God  not  to  destroy  all  mankind  ;  in  the  second 
he  sees  an  apocalyptic  foreshadowing  of  future  history 
down  to  the  time  of  Herod  the  Great  (?)  with  a  picture 
of  the  days  of  the  Messiah. 

Chapters  xc,  xci.  contain  Enoch's  words  of  con- 
solation and  exhortation  to  his  children. 

Chapter  xcii.  to  v.  18  is  a  sketch  of  history  in  ten 
weeks  or  periods,  of  which  the  first  is  signalised  by  the 
birth  of  Enoch ;  the  second  by  the  Flood ;  the  third 
by  the  life  of  Noah ;  the  fourth  by  Moses ;  the  fifth 
by  the  building  of  Solomon's  Temple ;  the  sixth  by 
Ezra;  the  seventh  by  the  encroachments  of  heathenism  ; 
the  eighth  by  rewards,  punishments,  and  the  building 
of  a  new  Temple  ;  the  ninth  by  the  Messianic  kingdom  ; 
the  tenth  by  the  judgment  of  men  and  angels,  and  the 
renovation  of  the  world. 

From  xcii.  19 — civ.  the  book  is  mainly  didactic, 
being  full  of  promises  and  threatenings.  In  the  last 
chapter  (cv.)  Enoch  relates  the  birth  of  Noah,  and 
prophesies  that  he  shall  be  the  founder  of  a  new  race. 

The  Ethiopic  text  is  undoubtedly  translated  from 
the  Greek,  of  which  we  find  fragments  in  St.  Jude, 
in  Justin  Martyr,  and  other  Fathers,  and  in  the  Testa- 
ment of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs}  Whether  the  Greek 
is  itself  a  translation  from  an  original  Hebrew  book 
is  uncertain.     Origen  seems  to  imply  that  this  was  the 

^  Oiig.  Horn.  28 ;  in  Num.  xxxiv. 


520  APPENDIX. 

case,  for  he  says  that  the  Books  (libelli)  were  not 
regarded  as  authoritative  "  among  the  Hebrews."  That 
the  book  in  its  present  form  is  not  by  one  author, 
and  that  the  Noachian  parts  of  it  are  by  another  hand, 
is  clear.  From  internal  evidence  it  appears  that  part 
at  least  of  the  book  (chapters  i. — xxxv.,  Ixxi. — cv.)  was 
written  in  the  days  of  the  Maccabees ;  and  that 
chapters  xxxvii. — Ixx.  are  not  earlier  than  the  days  of 
Herod  the  Great,  and  are  full  of  still  more  recent 
interpolations.  Volkmar  has  endeavoured  to  prove 
that,  as  a  whole,  it  is  not  earlier  than  the  reign  of 
Hadrian,  and  that  it  expresses  the  views  of  E,.  Akiva.^ 

One  reason  for  the  slighting  estimate  of  the  book 
by  the  Jews  may  be  that  the  writer  shows  no  in- 
terest in  the  ritual  and  Ceremonial  Law,  and  makes 
no  special  mention  either  of  circumcision  or  of  the 
Sabbath. 


EXCURSUS  V. 

RABBINIC   ALLUSIONS  IN  ST.  JUDE. 

The  direct  citation  of  St.  Jude  (verses  14,  15)  from 
the  Book  of  Enoch  is  taken  from  the  second  chapter,  but 
it  is  by  no  means  the  only  trace  of  a  similarity  between 
the  two  writers. 

i.  Jude  6  dwells  on  the  fall  of  the  angels  which 
"  kept  not  their  own  dominion,"  but  "  left  their  own 
habitation,    and    are    reserved     in    everlasting     bonds 

^  For  further  information,  see  Abp.  Lawrence's  Prelivi.  Dissert,  and 
Translation  (1821) ;  Hofmanu,  Das  Buch  Henoch  (1833) ;  and  in  Ersch 
and  Griiber,  Encycl.  s.  v. ;  Liicke,  Einleit.  in  d.  Offenh.  i.  89 — 144 ;  Gfrorer. 
Jahth.  d.  Heils,  i.  93  fg. ;  and  especially  A.  Dillmaun,  Das  Buch  Henoch 
(1853). 


RABBINIC    ALLUSIONS.  521 

under  darkness  unto  the  judgment  of  the  Great 
Day"  (comp.  2  Pet.  ii.  4,  5).  This,  as  we  have  seen, 
is  a  topic  which  occupies  a  large  part  of  the  Book 
of  Enoch.  In  vii.  2  we  are  told  of  two  hundred 
angels  who  descended  on  Ardis,  the  top  of  Mount 
Armon.  In  xii.  5 — 7,  we  are  told  that  they  "have 
deserted  the  lofty  sky  and  their  holy  everlasting 
habitation,  .  .  .  and  have  been  greatly  corrupted 
on  the  earth,"  and  in  xiv.  4,  that  they  are  "to  be 
bound  on  earth  as  long  as  the  ivorld  endures,''  and 
(xvi.  5)  that  they  are  "never  to  obtain  peace."  Their 
prison-house,  where  they  are  to  be  "  kept  for  ever " 
(xxi.  6),  is  "  a  terrific  place,"  and  they  are  "  confined 
in  a  network  of  iron  and  brass  "  (liv.  6),  which  never- 
theless consists  of  "fetters  of  iron  without  weight." 
The  last  expression  is  an  antiphrasis  like  the  "clank- 
less  chains "  of  Shelley,  and  the  "  fetters,  yet  not  of 
brass,"  of  ^Eschylus.  The  author  of  the  Second 
Epistle  of  Peter,  with  lyric  boldness,  speaks  of  these 
fetters  as  "chains  of  darkness,"  and  the  author  of  the 
Book  of  Wisdom  (xvii.  2,  16,  17)  evidently  had  a 
similar  picture  in  his  mind  when  he  speaks  of  the 
Egyptians  as  "  fettered  with  the  bonds  of  a  long 
night,"  "  shut  up  in  a  prison  without  iron  bars,"  and 
"  bound  with  one  chain  of  darkness."  These  fallen 
angels  are  shut  up  in  a  "  burning  valley,"  and  yet 
its  fires  give  no  light,  or  only  "  teach  light  to 
counterfeit  a  gloom,"  for  they  are  "  covered  with 
darkness,"  and  they  "see  no  light"  (Enoch  x.  1 — 9). 
ii.  Again,  in  v.  13  St.  Jude  compares  the  corrupted 
Antinomians  whom  he  is  denouncing  as  "  wandering 
stars  to  whom  is  reserved  the  blackness  of  darkness 
for  ever."     We  might  have  supposed  that  the  metaphor 


522  APPENDIX. 

was  derived  from  meteors  disappearing  into  the  night, 
or  comets  rushing  off  into  the  illimitable  void.  But 
from  the  Book  of  Enoch  (xviii.  14, 10)  we  are  led  to  infer 
that,  by  the  "  wandering  stars  "  are  meant  quite  literally 
planets  {a(7Tipe<i  'jrXavijTai),  not,  as  Bengel  supposed, 
because  they  are  opaque,  but  because  they  are  regarded 
(with  the  sun  and  moon)  as  "  seven  stars  .... 
which  transgressed  the  commandment  of  God  . 
for  they  came  not  in  their  projjer  season"  What  was  the 
exact  conception  in  the  writer's  mind  is  impossible 
to  say,  but  he  may  have  identified  the  planets  with 
evil  spirits  because  they  were  objects  of  idolatrous 
worship,  and  were  named  after  heathen  deities.^ 

iii.  Once  more,  in  v.  7  St.  Jude  seems  distinctly  to 
imply  that  the  sin  of  the  Fallen  Angels  was  analogous 
to  that  of  the  cities  of  the  Plain,  in  that  they,  by  unions 
with  mortal  women,  went  after  strange  flesh.  This  is 
exactly  the  view  of  the  pseudo-Enoch.  He  makes 
Enoch  reproach  them  (xv.  1 — 7),  because  being  by 
nature  spiritual,  they  "  have  done  as  those  who  are  flesh 
and  blood  do,"  and  have  thereby  transgressed  the  very 
law  of  their  nature. 

iv.  Nor  are  these  the  only  references  to  Eabbinic  and 
other  legends  by  St.  Jude.  In  verse  5  it  is  said  that 
"  Jesus  "  led  the  people  out  of  Egypt,  and  in  the  second 
instance  destroyed  them.  The  use  of  the  name  "  Jesus  " 
for  "  Christ "  shows  perhaps  the  somewhat  late  date 
of  the  Epistle.  When  St.  Paul  alludes  to  the  legendary 
wanderings  of  the  Eock  in  the  desert  (1  Cor.  x.  4),  he 
adds  the  allegory  "  and  that  Eock  was  Christ."  In 
saying  that  "  Jesus  "  saved  the  people  out  of  the  land 

1  For  tv\'o  remarkable  parallels  between  the  Book  of  Euoch  and  the 
Apocalypse,  see  the  Notes  on  Rev.  \\.  10,  11.  and  xiv.  20. 


RABBINIC    ALLUSIONS.  523 

of  Egypt,  St.  Jude  seems  to  be  identifying  Him  with 
the  Pillar  of  Fire,  which  is  one  of  the  many  divine 
manifestations  to  which  Philo  compares  the  Logos. ^ 

V.  The  strange  reference  to  a  dispute  between 
Michael  and  Satan  about  the  body  of  Moses  has  not 
yet  been  traced  to  any  source  whatever.  Origen  says 
that  it  was  taken  from  an  Apocryphal  book  called 
Tlie  Assumption  of  Moses  ;  and  fficumenius  sa3^s  that 
Satan  claimed  the  body  of  Moses  because  he  had  killed 
the  Egyptian.  The  words  "  The  Lord  rebuke  thee," 
are  addressed  to  Satan  by  the  Lord  (who  is  perhaps 
meant  to  be  the  same  as  the  Angel  of  the  Lord  in 
the  previous  verse),  in  Zech.  iii.  2.  The  nearest 
approach  to  this  legend  is  in  the  Targum  of  Jonathan 
on  Deut.  xxxiv.  6,  where  we  are  told,  with  obvious 
reference  to  some  similar  story,  that  the  grave  of 
Moses  was  entrusted  to  the  charge  of  Michael. 

vi.  Again,  when  it  is  said  that  these  false  and 
polluted  Christians  "  went  in  the  way  of  Cain,"  the 
reference  cannot  be  to  anything  recorded  in  the  book  of 
Genesis.  There  the  only  crime  laid  to  the  charge  of 
Cain  is  murder.  The  reference  here  seems  to  be  mainly 
to  presumption  and  blasphemy,  and  to  that  insolent 
atheism  with  which  Cain  is  charged  in  the  Jerusalem 
Targum  on  Gren.  iv.  7,  where  he  is  made  to  deny  that 
there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  Judge  or  a  judgment. 
The  allusion  cannot  be  to  the  blasj)heming  Gnostics 
who  called  themselves  Cainites,  for  we  do  not  hear 
of  them  till  much  later.^  It  is,  however,  remarkable 
that  they  chose  Cain,  the  Sodomites,  and  Korah  (who 
are   all  here   mentioned),   as  their  heroes,  and    as   the 

1  Quis  Ber.  Div.  Haer.,  aud  De  Vit.  Mos.  2. 

2  Iren.  c.  Haer.  i.  31 ;  Epiphan.  Haer.  38. 


524  APPENDIX. 

representatives  of  the  stronger  and  better  spiritual 
powers,  who  were  opposed  to  the  Demiurge  of  the 
Mosaic  Dispensation  and  the  material  world. 


EXCURSUS    YI. 

SPECIMENS    OF    PHILONIAN    ALLEGORY. 

1.  Commenting  on  Gen.  xvii.  16,  "  I  will  give  thee  a 
son  from  her"  and  explaining  it  of  the  joy  of  heart 
which  God  promises  to  the  virtuous,  Philo  adds  that 
some  explain  ''from  her "  to  mean  "  apart  from  her," 
because  Virtue  does  not  spring  from  the  soul,  but  from 
without,  even  from  God.  Others  explain  the  Greek  words 
as  though  they  were  a  single  word  {eocatttes),  meaning 
"  immediately ,''  because  all  divine  gifts  are  speedy  and 
spontaneous.  Others,  again,  make  "  from  her  "  mean 
''from  Virtue^'  which  is  the  mother  of  all  good.^  The 
simultaneous  existence  of  three  such  strange  devices  of 
exegesis  at  least  shows  that  Philo  might  take  his 
premises  for  granted  among  the  readers  whom  alone  he 
wished  to  address. 

2.  On  Gen.  xv.  15  he  says  that  in  "  Thou  shall  go 
to  thy  fathers"  some  understood  by  "fathers,"  not  "thy 
Chaldaean  forefathers,"  but  "  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars ;" 
others  explained  "  father  "  to  mean  "  archetypal  ideas, 
and  the  things  unseen ;"  others,  the  four  elements  and 
powers  of  which  the  universe  is  composed — earth,  air, 
fire,  and  water  ! " 

3.  Each  of  the  Patriarchs  represents  a  condition  of 

'  De  nomin.  mutat.  §  xxv.  (Mangey,  i.  599). 

"  Quis  rer.  div.  haer.  (Maing.  i,  513).     Be  Migr.  Abraham.,  ad  init. 


PHILONIAN    ALLEGORY.  525 

tlie  soul.  Abraham  represents  acquired  virtue  ;  Isaac, 
natural  virtue ;  Jacob,  virtue  acquired  by  training ; 
Joseph,  political  virtue.  Sarah  represents  generic  virtue, 
virtue  in  the  abstract ;  Eebecca  represents  endurance ; 
Leah  is  persecuted  virtue;  Pharaoh  is  the  mind  set  against 
God  ;  Moses  is  the  prophetic  word.  Everything  and 
every  person  stands  for  something  else.  Egypt  repre- 
sents the  body  ;  Canaan  symbolises  piety.  A  kingdom 
is  an  emblem  of  Divine  wisdom ;  a  pigeon,  of  human 
wisdom  ;  a  sheep,  of  the  pure  soul. 

4.  Writing  on  Gren.  xviii.  6,  he  idealises  the 
appearance  of  the  three  angels  into  the  fact  that  the 
seeking  soul  recognises  God,  His  love,  and  His  might. 
The  three  measures  of  meal  indicate  that  the  soul  must 
embrace  and  treasure  up  this  threefold  manifestation  of 
God.  The  word  for  cakes  {enkrupliias)  means  that  the 
Sacred  word  about  God  and  His  power  must  be  con- 
cealed in  the  initiated  soul.^ 

5.  On  Gen.  xxxii.  10,  "  With  my  staff  I  passed  over 
this  Jordan,"  he  says  it  would  be  a  poor  thing  {ra-jreivov) 
to  understand  it  literally.  Jordan  means  all  that  is 
base,  the  staff  means  discipline  :  Jacob  intended  to 
imply  that  by  discipline  he  had  risen  above  base- 
ness. 

Only  by  such  means  could  Philo  get  rid  of  the 
representation  of  God  as  having  human  parts  and 
human  passions.  But  with  this  method  he  can  boldly 
sot  aside,  as  literally  false  and  only  allegorically  true, 
whatever  offends  his  philosophic  convictions.  Thus,  on 
Gen.  ii.  21,  after  saying  that  the  letter  of  the  narrative 
is  mythical,  he  argues  that  otherwise  it  would  be  absurd. 

'  eyKpvcptas  means  "  cakes  baked  by  being  hidden  in  ashes  "  (De  Sacr. 
Abel  et  Gain,  Mang.  i.  173). 


526  APPENDIX. 

By  "  ribs  "  are  meant  merely  the  powers  of  life/  and  the 
notion  that  Eve  was  formed  out  of  a  material  rib 
seems  to  him  deg-radinfj. 

C.  He  often  accepts  the  general  fact,  but  alle- 
gorises all  the  details.  The  tree  of  Paradise,  the 
serpent,  and  the  expulsion,  are  merely  symbols ;  and  he 
confidently  addresses  his  explanation  of  them  to  "  the 
initiated."  The  heart  of  his  system  is  seen  in  his 
comments  on  "  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image!'  The 
plural  shows,  he  says,  that  the  angels  as  well  as  God 
had  a  share  in  the  making  of  man,  and  since  man  is  of 
mixed  nature,  we  must  suppose  that  the  good  side  of 
his  nature  came  from  God,  the  weak  side  from  the 
angels.  But  he  goes  on  to  explain  that  the  verse 
applies  to  the  creation  of  man  in  the  idea,  not  in  the 
concrete. 


EXCUESTJS    VII. 

ADDITIONAL    ILLUSTRATIONS    OF    PHILO's  VIEWS   ABOUT 
THE    LOGOS. 

In  God,  no  less  than  in  man,  Philo  distinguishes 
between  the  speech  and  the  reason.  The  Divine  reason 
embraces  the  whole  intelligible  world,  the  world  of 
ideas,  what  he  sometimes  calls  "  the  idea  of  ideas." 
The  Divine  speech  includes  the  whole  world  of  active 
agents  and  Divine  forces. 

(i.)  Hence  it  is  that,  in  a  phrase  borrowed  by  Apollos 
(Heb.  iv.  12),  he  calls  the  Word  "the  cutter  of  all 
things."  The  phrase  is  founded  on  an  allegorical 
explanation    of  Gen.  xv.   9.       Philo   says  that  in  the 

^  Leg.  allegg.  i.  18  (Maiig.  i.  70). 


THE    LOGOS.  527 

sacrifice  tliere  described  the  slie-goat  s^Tabolises  tlie 
sense,  the  calf  the  soul,  the  dove  Divine  wisdom,  the 
pigeon  human  wisdom.  The  wise  man  sees  all  these 
as  gifts  from  above.  The  text  says  that  "  he  "  divided 
these  sacrifices,  and  since  the  name  of  Abraham  is  not 
repeated,  "  he  "  must  mean  the  Logos,  and  the  truth 
indicated  is  that  the  Logos,  "  whetted  to  sharpest 
edge,"  divides  all  perceptible  things  to  their  inmost 
depths — the  soul  into  the  reasonable  and  the  unreason- 
able; speech  into  true  and  false;  the  world  of  sense  into 
distinct  and  indistinct  phenomena.  These  divided  parts 
are,  by  way  of  contrast,  placed  opposite  to  each  other. 
The  doves  alone  are  not  divided,  because  Divine  wisdom 
is  simple,  and  cannot  be  cleft  into  opposing  contrarieties.^ 
Thus  God,  whetting  His  Word,  which  cutteth  all  things, 
divides  the  formless  and  abstract  essence  of  all  things, 
and  the  four  elements  of  the  universe,  and  the  animals 
and  plants  compounded  from  them.  Hence  the  phrase, 
"  the  cutter  Word,"  seems  to  be  based  on  the  distinction 
between  the  Logos  as  the  primeval  Idea,  and  the  Logos 
as  a  creative  Force. 

(ii.)  The  world  of  Ideas,  to  which  the  existing  world 
corresponds  as  a  copy  to  its  archetype,  lies  in  the 
Divine  Logos.  Philo  illustrates  this  by  saying  that,  when 
Grod  bade  Moses  to  lift  up  a  serpent  in  the  wilderness. 
He  did  not  say  of  what  metal  it  was  to  be  made, 
because  the  ideas  of  Grod  are  abstract  and  immaterial ; 
Moses,  in  carrying  out  the  concrete  realisation,  is 
obliged  to  use  some  substance,  and  therefore  makes  the 
serpent  of  brass. ^     Similarly  he  holds  that   God  is  not 

^  Qids  ret.  div.  haer.  §  xlviii.  (Manpf.  i.  491) ;  see  Gfrorer,  Philo,  i. 
18i— 187. 

2  Leg.  allegg.  ii.  §  20  (Mang.  i.  80). 


528  APPENDIX. 

to  be  grasped  by  human  knowledge,  but  that  the  Word 
is.  Hence,  writing  on  Gen.  xxii.  IC,  he  says,  "God  is 
the  God  of  wise  and  perfect  beings,  but  the  Logos  is  the 
God  of  us  who  are  imperfect." 

(iii.)  Philo  uses  so  many  analogies  to  express  his 
notion  of  the  Logos  that  he  falls  into  contradictions,  and 
leaves  his  readers  in  confusion.  The  Logos,  in  various 
passages  of  his  voluminous  writings,  is  the  creator  of 
species,  although  He  is  Himself  the  Idea  of  Ideas ;  He 
is  the  seal  of  God ;  He  is  the  Divine  force  which  dwells 
in  the  universe ;  He  is  the  chain  or  band  which  keeps 
the  world  together ;  He  is  the  law  and  ordinance  of  all 
things  ;  He  is  the  giver  of  wisdom,  the  warden  of  virtue  ; 
He  is  the  manna  which  nourishes  the  soul ;  He  is  the 
fatherland  of  wise  souls,  the  pilot  of  the  wise;  He  is 
their  controlling  conscience,  their  Paraclete ;  He  is  the 
Divine  wisdom  which  is  the  daughter  of  God.^ 


EXCUESUS    VIII. 

PATRISTIC    EVIDENCE    AS    TO    THE    AUTHORSHIP    OF    THE 
EPISTLE    TO    THE    HEBREWS. 

The  canonicity  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  its 
right  to  be  accepted  as  a  part  of  Holy  Scripture,  the 
perfect  truthfulness  of  the  contemporary  character  which 
it  assumes,  its  greatness,  importance,  and  authority,  and 
the  fact  that  it  was  written  before  the  fall  of  Jerusalem, 
are  not  in  question.  These  points  have  never  been 
seriously  disputed.  Some  have  seen  allusions  to  the 
Epistle  in  St.   James  and   the    Second  of    St.   Peter." 

^  See  various  passages  quoted  in  Gfrorer,  Philo,  i.  176 — 243. 
2  2  Pet.  iii.  15,  16 ;  Ja.  ii.  24,  25. 


EPISTLE    TO    THE    HEBREWS.  529 

Setting  these  aside  as  improbable,  it  was  certainly  known 
to  St.  Clemens  of  Rome,  and  largely  used  by  him  in  his 
letter  to  the  Corinthians ;  ^  and  it  is  possible — though 
no  more — that  it  was  the  source  of  some  of  the  parallels 
adduced  from  the  writings  of  Ignatius,  Polycarp,  Justin 
Martyr,  and  the  Pseudo-Barnabas.  But  in  the  Western 
Church  no  single  writer  of  the  first,  second,  or  even  third 
century  quoted  it  as  St.  PauVs.  Not  only  did  Basilides 
{cir.  A.D.  125)  exclude  it,  though  he  acknowledged  the 
other  Paulinic  Epistles,"  but  we  are  expressly  told  that 
St.  Hippolytus  (t  235  ?)  denied  that  it  was  written  by  St. 
Paul.  The  authority  for  this  fact  is  late  and  heretical,'^ 
yet  there  seems  no  reason  to  reject  so  positive  a  state- 
ment. And  this  remark  of  St.  Hippolytus,  together 
with  the  place  assigned  to  the  Epistle  in  the  Peshito, 
indicates  the  opinion  of  the  Syrian  Church  in  the  first 
half  of  the  third  century,  if,  as  seems  probable,  the 
learned  and  eloquent  Bishop  of  Portus  came  originally 
from  Antioch.*  We  have  the  same  assurance  about  St. 
Irenaeus  (f  a.d.  202).  We  find  from  Eusebius  that  in  a 
work   attributed  to  Irenaeus   (but  which  Eusebius  had 


'  'Ev  fi  Tjjs  trphs  'Kfipaiovs  TroWa  vo-fifiara  irapadfls  rjSr)  S«  Kol  avTo\4^ei 
prfTois  nail/  e'|  avTrjs  XP'')'^^I^^''°^  <ra<pe<TTara  TvapL(Trr)cnv  on  fx^  vehv  vwapx^'-  '''^ 
(rvyypafifia  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  38).  "  Omnino  graudis  iu  utraqne  .similitudo 
est  "  (Jer.  De  Virr.  illiist.).  "  Der  Hebraerbrief  ist  ganz  uiid  gar  in  sein 
Denken  iibergegangen "  (Tholuck,  Einleit.  2).  Yet,  strange  to  say, 
Clemens  never  vientions  it  by  name.  This  alone  seems  almost  fatal  to  the 
Pauline  authorship. 

'^  Jer.  Procem.  in  Ep.  ad  Tit.  Basilides  was  a  Gnostic,  but  he  seems 
to  have  adopted  the  ordinary  Canon  of  his  day ;  this,  therefore,  would  seem 
to  show  that  at  that  time  the  Alexandrians  did  not  recognise  the  Epistle 
as  St.  Paul's. 

3  Steph.  Gobar,  ap.  Phot.  Bibl.  Cod.  iii.  291  (Migne) ;  and  also 
Photius  himself  (Wieseler,  Untersuch.  i.  12). 

■•  Gieseler,  i.  §  341.  On  Hippolytus  see  Kurtz,  K.  G.  i.  106.  Monim- 
sen,  Abhandl.  d.  Scichs.  Gesellsch.  i.  595. 

i  i 


530  APPENDIX. 

never  secn)^  he  quoted  from  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
and// am  lite  Wisdom  of  Solomon.  But  no  such  quotation 
was  to  be  found  in  any  of  his  best-known  works,  and  in 
any  case  he  did  not  assign  the  Epistle  to  St.  Paul.' 
Indeed,  the  mention  of  the  Epistle  with  the  Wiadoni  of 
Solomon  seems  to  imply  that  he  regarded  the  two  works 
as  standing-  on  the  same  footing.  The  Presbyter  Gains 
only  recognised  thirteen  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  did 
not  number  this  Epistle  among  tliem.^  The  Canon  of 
Muratori  {cir.  a.d.  170)  either  does  not  allude  to  it,  or 
only  under  the  damaging  description  of  a  letter  to  the 
Alexandrians,  current  under  the  name  of  Paul,  but 
forged  in  the  interests  of  Marcion's  heresy  ("  ad  haeresim 
Marcionis  ")/  It  is  remarkable  that  Marcion,  in  the 
middle  of  the  second  century,  rejected  it,  though  many 
passages  might  have  been  used  to   support  his  views. 

^  The  B(/9Aioj'  SiaXe^eoov  5ia(p6pwi', 

2  The  fragment  in  which  he  is  suj)posed  to  quote  Heb.  xiii.  14  (Stieren's 
Irenaeus,  i.  854,  seq. ;  ii.  361,  seq.)  is  of  very  doubtful  genuiueuess,  and 
even  if  genuine  proves  nothing. 

2  Gaius,  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  \i.  20.  As  he  makes  this  remark  in  imme- 
diate connexion  with  severe  animadversions  on  tlie  precipitance  {TrpoireTeiav) 
and  audacity  of  those  who  admitted  tlie  autlieuticity  of  spurious  writings, 
it  would  appear  that  he  even  regarded  the  Pauline  hypothesis  with  some 
indignation ;  and  as  he  was  a  Xoyiwraros  avi}p,  his  opinion  is  important. 
Nothing,  however,  is  known  of  Gaius,  and  Bp.  Lightfoot  {Journ.  of 
Philology,  i.  98)  has  conjectured  that  he  is  none  other  than  Hippolytus 
using  his  own  prsenomen  as  an  interlocutor  in  the  dialogue  against 
Montanism. 

*  If  "Gaius"  was,  as  Muratori  thought,  the  author  of  the  celebrated 
Canon,  the  next  remark,  "fel  enim  cum  niello  miscori  non  congruit,"  would 
harmonise  with  the  severe  sentiments  alluded  to  in  the  previous  note,  and 
there  would  be  an  additional  sting  in  this  if  we  accept  the  suggested 
allusion  to  Heb.  xii.  15,  and  tlie  reading,  eV  x"^^  for  ff^x^V-  The  writer  of 
the  Canon  says  that  St.  Paul  only  wrote  (like  St.  John)  to  seven  Churches. 
Delitzsch  and  Liinemann  say  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  cannot  be 
meant  by  the  "  Epistle  to  the  Alexandrians,"  because  it  is  anonymous ;  but 
the  writer  of  the  Canon  does  not  say  that  it  was  "  iuscxnbed  "  with  the 
name  of  Paul.   (See  Wieseler,  i.  27,  and  Hesse,  Das  Miirat.  Frag.  p.  201/".) 


EPISTLE    TO    THE    HEBREWS.  531 

Novatian,  useful  as  it  would  have  been  to  liim,  and  fre- 
quently as  he  quotes  Scripture,  never  even  alludes  to  it. 
Tertullian  (f  a.d.  240)  ascribes  it  to  St.  Barnabas,^  and 
did  not  regard  it  as  a  work  of  St.  Paul,  for  he  taunts 
Marcion  with  falsifying  the  number  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles 
by  omitting  (only)  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  St.  Cyprian 
(t  A.D.  258),  in  his  voluminous  treatises,  neither  quotes 
nor  mentions  it.  Yictorinus  (f  a.d.  308)  ignores  it.  It 
is  separated  or  omitted  in  some  of  the  oldest  MSS.  of  the 
Vetus  Itala.^  The  hrst  writer  of  the  Western  Church 
who  ascribes  it  to  St.  Paul  (and  probably  because  he 
found  it  so  ascribed  in  Greek  writers)  is  Hilary  of 
Poictiers,  who  died  a.d.  368.^  It  was  not  till  quite  the 
close  of  the  fourth  century  that  in  the  Western  Church 

1  Tert.  c.  3Iarc.  v.  20. 

2  No  name  is  attached  to  it  in  the  Peshito,  and  the  fact  that  in  that 
version  it  is  placed  after  all  the  thirteen  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  in  spite  of  its 
size  and  importance,  seems  to  show  decisively  that  the  Syriac  translators 
did  not  regard  it  as  the  work  of  the  Apostle  (Wieseler,  Eine  Untersueliuny 
ilher  d.  Hebrderbrief  (1861),  i.  9).  It  is  only  in  later  Syriac  versions  tliat 
it  is  called  "  The  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Hebrews." 

^  In  the  fourth  century  neither  Phoebadius,  nor  Zeno,  nor  Hilary  the 
Deacon,  nor  Optatus  once  quote  it,  though  they  frequently  quote  St.  Paul ; 
nor,  in  the  fifth  century,  Siricius,  Caelestiue  I.,  Leo  the  Great,  Orosius, 
Evagrius,  or  Sedulius.  St.  Ambrose  (f  397),  a  student  of  Greek  writers, 
quotes  it  as  St.  Paul's,  and  so  does  his  friend  Philastrius  ;  but  the  latter 
tells  that  it  was  not  read  to  the  people  in  church,  or  only  "  sometimes,"  and 
(in  another  passage)  that  it  had  been  ordained  by  the  Apostles  and  their 
successors  that  only  thirteen  Epistles  of  St.  Faul  (and  therefore  not  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews)  should  be  read  in  the  Catholic  Church.  Latin 
writers  misunderstood,  and  therefore  found  it  difficult  to  accept,  the  phrase 
"  To  Him  that  made  Him,"  r(^  woiria-avTi.  aWhu  ("  quia  et  factum  Christum 
dixit "),  in  iii.  2;  and  they  looked  with  suspicion  on  the  rhetorical  style 
("quia  rhetorice  scripsit  sermoue  plausibili  ") ,  and  disliked  the  use  made 
by  the  Novatian  schismatics  of  vi.  4^-8,  which  St.  Ambrose  finds  it  hard 
to  reconcile  with  St.  Paul's  conduct  to  the  Corinthian  offender  {De 
Foenitent.  ii.  2).  The  intrinsic  greatness  of  the  Epistle  overcame  these 
hesitations,  and,  when  once  accepted,  it  was  accepted  as  St.  Paul's 
on  the  supposed  authority  and  undoubted  custom  of  the  Alexandrian 
writers. 

i  i  2 


532  APPENDIX. 

it  began  to  be  popularly  accepted  as  St.  Paul's.  As  this 
popular  acceptance  at  that  late  epoch  does  not  possess 
any  critical  importance,  it  is  needless  to  enumerate  the 
names  of  writers  who  merely  run  in  the  ordinary  groove. 
Among  those  writers  who  really  thought  about  the 
matter  doubts  as  to  the  Pauline  authorship  were  ex- 
pressed—  as,  for  instance,  by  Isidore  of  Seville — as  late 
as  the  seventh  century.^  Now,  even  if  this  fact  stood 
alone — that  the  Western  Church  for  nearly  four  cen- 
turies refused  to  admit  the  Pauline  authorship  —  we 
should  regard  it  as  fatal  to  that  hypothesis,  x'^nd  for 
this  reason.  If  it  had  been  written  by  St.  Paul,  it  is 
inconceivable  that  St.  Clemens  of  Rome,  his  contemporary 
and  friend,  should  not  have  known  that  it  was  so.  St. 
Paul  was  not  thus  in  the  habit  of  concealing  an  identity 
which,  on  the  contrary,  he  habitually  placed  in  the  fore- 
ground. But  if  St.  Clemens  had  been  aware  that  it  was 
really  a  work  of  St.  Paul,  nothing  can  be  more  certain 
than  that  he  would  have  mentioned  so  precious  a  truth 
to  the  Church  of  which  he  was  bishop.  If  he  said  any- 
thing at  all  about  the  authorship,  it  must  have  been 
that  whoever  wrote  it  Paul  did  not.  Thus,  and  thus 
only,  can  we  account  for  the  conviction  of  the  Poman 
Church  for  nearly  four  centuries,  that  the  opinion  about 
it  in  the  Eastern  Church  was  erroneous.  To  say  that 
St.  Clemens,  "  in  his  love  for  the  author,  would  not  do 
what  the  author  himself  has  not  done  ;  he  would  not 
betray  the  secret,  &c.,"  is  to  overlook  plain  facts  in  the 
desire  to  support  current  traditions.  Anyone  may  see 
for  himself  that  the  author,  though  he  does  not  mention 
his  own  name,  has  no  wish  to  conceal  his  identit}'  from 
those  to  whom  he  wrote,  and,  indeed,  assumes  that  they 

'  t  ^D-  636. 


GENERAL    CITATION.  533 

were  perfectly  aware  who  it  was  who  was  thus  addressing 
them.  The  Apostolic  letters,  it  must  be  remembered, 
were  always  conveyed  to  their  destination  by  responsible 
and  accredited  messengers.  No  Apostolic  Church  would 
have  paid  attention  to  an  unauthenticated  epistle. 

How   very   little   weight  can  be    attached   to   the 
quotation  of  the  Epistle  in  a  loose  and  popular  way  as 
St.  Paul's  ma}''  be  seen  in  the  case  of  two  great  men,  St. 
Jerome   (f  a.d.  420)  and  St.  Augustine  (f  a.d.  430). 
By  their   time — in    the   fifth    century — the   current  of 
irresponsible    opinion    ran    strongly   in   favour   of   the 
Pauline   authorship,  and  to  throw  any  doubt  upon   it 
was  to  brave  the  charge  of  being  arrogant  or  unorthodox. 
It  is  not,  therefore,  surprising  that  both  these  remark- 
able men  in  an  ordinary  way  speak  of  the  Epistle  as  St. 
Paul's  in  passages  where  they  merely  wish  to  make  an 
allusion  without  exciting  a  controversy.       They   were 
justified  in  doing  this,  because  they  saw  that  even  though 
it  could  not  have  been  written  by  St.  Paul,  yet  it  was 
Pauline  in  its  main  doctrines.     In  ordinary  treatises  it 
was  not  desirable  to  be  constantly  correcting  the  multi- 
tude.    But  when  they  are  writing  carefully  and  accu- 
rately they  are  too  independent  not  to  indicate  their  real 
opinion.     St.  Jerome  over  and  over  again  quotes  it  as  St. 
Paul's,  yet  often  with  the  addition  of  some  doubting  or 
deprecatory  phrase.     When  he  deals  directly  with  the 
question,  he  treats  it  as  unimportant,  but  admits  that 
the  Epistle  was  accepted  with  some  hesitancy,^  and  that 
many  considered  it  to   be   the    work    of  Barnabas    or 
Clemens."     St.  Augustine  often  quotes  it  as  St.  Paul's, 

'  Even  Rufinus,  though  he  supposed  it  to  be  by  St.  Paul,  adds,  "  Si  quis 
tamen  earn  recepcrit."  {Invect.  in  Hieron.) 

2  His  opinion  seems   to  have  wavered   more  than  once   (see   Bleek, 


534  APPENDIX. 

and  liis  authority  liad  probably  no  small  share  in  in- 
fluencing the  Synods,  which  declared  it  to  be  authentic.^ 
Yet  in  his  later  writings  he  so  constantly  quotes  it 
merely  as  "  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,"  that  Lardner 
says,  "  One  would  think  that  he  studiously  declines  to 
call  it  Paul's."^  The  "accommodation"  to  which  these 
eminent  wi'iters  condescended  in  popularly  referring  to 
it  as  being  (in  a  sense)  a  work  of  the  Aj)ostle,  led  to  the 
rigidity  of  the  ordinary  acceptance  ;  yet  even  at  the 
close  of  the  sixth  century  "  no  Latin  commentary  on  it 
was  known  to  Cassiodorus."^ 

Introd.),  but  lie  never  felt  at  all  sure  that  St.  Paul  wrote  it.  "  Quicunque 
est  ille,  qui  ad  Hebraeos  seripsit  epistolam  "  ( Comm.  in  Amos, 'Bi).  '^  Si 
quis  vult  recipere  earn  epistolam  quae  sub  nomine  Pauli  ad  Hebraeos 
scripta  est"  [Comment,  in  Tit.).  "  Relege  ad  Hebraeos  epistolam  Pauli, 
sive  cvjuscitnque  alterius  earn  esse  putas,  quia  jam  inter  ecclesiasticas  est 
recepta"  {id.).  "  Et  PauVas  apostolus  loquitur,  si  quis  tamen  ad 
Hebraeos  epistolam  suseipit "  {in  Ezeh.  xxviii.).  "  Omues  Graeci  recipiunt 
et  nonnulli  Lalinorum"  {Cotnm.  in  Matt.  c.  26).  "Licet  de  ea  multi 
Latinorum  dubitent"  {Gated.  59).  "  Apud  Romanes  usqiie  hodie  quasi 
apostoli  Pauli  non  habetur  "  [in  Is.  viii.  18).  "  Pauli  quoque  idcirco  ad 
Hebraeos  ci)istolae  contradicitur,  quod  ad  Hebraeos  scribeus  utatur  testi- 
moniis  quae  in  Hebraeis  voluminibus  non  liabentur  "  {in  Is.  vi.  9).  "  Et 
nihil  interesse  cujns  sit,  cum  ecclesiastici  viri  sit,  et  quotidie  ecclesiarnm 
lectione  celebretur"  [Ep.  129,  ad  Dard.),  etc. 

1  Hippo,  A.D.  393 ;  Third  Council  of  Carthage,  a.d.  398  ;  Fifth  Council 
of  Carthage,  a.d.  419.  But  the  two  former  Councils  only  say  "  Thirteen 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  one  of  his  to  the  Hebrews." 

-  The  force  of  truth  compels  him  to  insert  an  occasional  caution,  such 
as  "  Quamquam  nonnullis  incerta  sit ;  "  "  quoquo  modo  se  habeat  ista 
quaestio;  "  "  quam  plurcs  apostoli  Paidi  esse  dicunt,  quidam  vero  negant," 
etc.  See  the  mauy  passages  referred  to  in  the  exhaustive  catalogue  of 
Block,  from  whom  all  succeeding  commentators  have  freely  borrowed. 
Nothing  can  show  more  forcibly  tlie  mamier  in  which  writer  after  writer 
will  snatch  at  the  most  futile  explanation  of  something  which  tells  against 
a  current  notion  than  that  wo  find  Augustine  repeating  the  absurdity, 
whicli  has  lasted  down  to  our  own  day,  that  St.  Paul  concealed  his  name 
in  order  not  to  offend  the  Jews  !  ("  Principium  salutatorium  de  industria 
dicitur  omisisse,  ne  Judaei  nomine  ejus  offensi  vel  iuimico  animo  legcrent, 
vel  omuino  non  legerent."  etc.  {Expos.  Ep.  ad  Bom.  §  11). 

'  Davidson,  ii.  227.    That  the  old  hesitation  continued  maybe  seen  from 


THE    EASTERN    CHURCH.  535 

The  opinion  of  the  Eastern  Church  originated  in 
Alexandria.  To  the  Alexandrian  School,  though  they 
did  not  discover  the  secret  of  the  authorship,  the  Epistle 
was  extremely  precious,  because  it  exactly  expressed  their 
own  views,  and  was  founded  on  premises  with  which 
they  were  familiar.  It  was,  therefore,  natural  that  they 
should  desire  to  give  it  as  high  an  authority  as  possible  ; 
and  in  the  Epistle  itself  they  found  a  general  support 
for  the  notion  that  it  was  written  by  St.  Paul. 

(a.)  But  this  assertion  cannot  be  traced  farther 
back  than  to  the  unsupported  guess  of  the  venerable 
Pantaenus.  "  The  blessed  Presbyter,"  as  Clemens  of 
Alexandria  (f  a.d.  220)  calls  him  in  a  passage  of  his 
last  work,  the  Hypotyposes}  assigned  two  reasons  why 
St.  Paul  had  not  mentioned  his  own  name  in  the 
salutation,  as  he  does  in  every  other  Epistle.  It  was, 
he  said,  because  the  Lord  Himself  had  been  sent  to 
the  Hebrews  as  an  Apostle  of  the  Almighty,^  so  that 
St.  Paul  suppressed  his  own  name  out  of  modesty  ;  and 
it  also  was  because  St.  Paul  was  a  herald  and  Apostle 
of  the  Gentiles,  so  that  a  letter  from  him  to  the 
Hebrews  was,  so  to  speak,  a  work  of  supererogation.^ 

the  fact  that  it  formed,  originally  no  part  of  D  (Codex  Claromontanus),  is 
omitted  in  G  (Cod.  Boernerianus),  and  is  only  found  in  Latin  in  E  (Cod. 
Augiensis).  The  two  latter  MSS.  are  of  the  ninth  century.  In  the 
Vulgate  it  is  placed  after  Philemon. 

'  Af.  Euseb.  K.  E.  vi.  13.  It  is  clear  that  if  Eusebius  had  found  any 
traces  of  an  earlier  tradition  he  would  have  mentioned  them,  for  he 
brings  together  all  the  reasons  he  can  in  favour  of  the  Pauline  authorship. 
His  statement,  therefore,  tends  to  prove  that  even  in  the  Eastern  Church 
the  Epistle,  in  spite  of  its  obvious  phenomena,  had  not  been  assigned  to 
St.  Paul  by  any  writer  or  by  any  tradition  of  importance  in  the  first  two 
centuries.     (Wieseler,  i.  15.) 

^  The  expression  was  taken  by  Clemens  from  Heb.  iii.  I. 

3   Aio  /U6Tp((^T7jTa  .  .  .  5ia  T6  t))v  irphs  Thv  Kvpiov  Tifxi)v  SiUTe  rh  (K  irepiovffias  Koi 

To7s  'E^paiois  iTTiffrfWdv.    [Hyfotypones ;  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  vi.  1-i.) 


5^6  APPENDIX. 

Both  these  attempts  to  explain  a  fact  so  damaging  to  the 
Pauline  authorship  of  the  letter  are  untenable.  If  St. 
Peter  in  writing  to  Jews  calls  himself  an  Apostle,  there 
was  no  reason  why  St.  Paul  should  have  scrupled  to 
give  himself  the  same  title  ;  nor  was  the  division  of  office 
between  him  and  the  other  Apostles  so  rigid  as  to 
prevent  his  addressing  Jews.  The  "Apostolic  compact" 
did  not  prevent  St.  Peter  from  addressing  Gentiles.  If  it 
was  thus  rigid,  it  tells  against  St.  Paul's  having  written 
this  Epistle  at  all,  but  not  against  his  authenticating  it 
with  his  name.  He  constantly  addressed  Jews,  and  con- 
stantly maintained  against  them  his  independent  right 
to  the  highest  order  of  the  Apostolate.  In  writing  to 
them  he  would  have  been  least  inclined  to  waive  the 
dignity  which  he  had  received  directly  from  his  Lord. 
No  authority  can  therefore  be  allowed  to  the  opinion  of 
Panta?nus.  It  was  a  conjecture  derived  from  the  refer- 
ences at  the  close  of  the  letter,  and  possibly  even  from 
the  false  reading  "  wj/  chains"  {roU  SeafjuoU /jlov)  instead 
of  "  prisoners "  {B6afx,ioi,<i)  in  x.  34.^  The  conjectural 
suggestions  by  which  he  tried  to  support  his  opinion  are 
so  weak  that  they  actually  tell  against  it,  and  show  that 
the  eminence  of  Pantsenus  by  no  means  consisted  in  a 
power  of  critical  discernment. 

(d.)  If  the  great  St.  Clemens  of  Alexandria  accepted 
the  Pauline  authorship,  he  did  so  mainly  in  deference 
to  the  opinion  of  Pantsenus,  and  only  in  a  modified  form. 

'  Euthalius  (cir.  460)  especially  refers  to  roli  Sefffiols  nov  as  one  of  tlio 
arguments  for  the  Pauline  authorship.  (Migne,  Patr.  Graec.  Ixxxv.  77(», 
ap.  Bleek  ;  Alford,  iv.  1,  p.  15.)  ToU  Seff/jiiois  is  the  reading  of  A,  D,  tho 
Vulg.,  Pcshito.  &c.  But  even  if  the  received  text  be  right  (with  «.  E, 
H,  K,  &c.),  there  is  no  proof  that  the  wi-iter  is  St.  Paul,  but  only  that 
the  writer  had  been  in  prison — a  common  case  with  Christians  of  the  first 
century. 


ST.    CLEMEN'S    OF    ALEXANDRIA.  537 

For  although  he  often  quotes  the  Epistle  as  St.  Paul's, 
he  was  aware  of  the  difficulties  of  such  an  opinion.  He 
supposed  that  the  letter  was  originally  written  in 
Hebrew,  and  was  translated  into  Greek  by  St.  Luke. 
This  notion  may  have  originated  in  the  resemblance  of 
style  between  it  and  the  Acts.  With  this  suggestion 
we  shall  deal  later  on.  But  meanwhile  St.  Clemens, 
not  content  with  the  explanation  offered  by  Pantsenus 
of  the  anonymity  of  the  letter,  relies  on  another,  which 
is  still  more  groundless.  St.  Paul  suppressed  his  name, 
he  says,  because  he  did  not  wish  to  divert  the  attention 
of  the  Jews  from  his  arguments,  being  well  aware  that 
they  had  taken  a  prejudice  against  him  and  looked  on 
him  with  suspicion.^  Thus  even  St.  Clemens  contents 
himself  with  a  reason  which  will  not  stand  a  single 
moment's  consideration.  The  tone  of  the  letter  through- 
out, as  well  as  the  closing  salutations,  prove  that  the 
writer  is  known  to  his  readers ;  ^  and  the  supposition 
that  he  wanted  to  entrap  their  attention  before  revealing 
his  identity  is  too  singular  for  serious  refutation.^ 

(c.)  There  is  no  ancient  writer  whose  opinion  on  the 
subject  would  carry  more  weight  than  that  of  Origen, 
whose  splendid  originality  was  not  crushed  by  his 
immense  erudition.  Now  it  is  quite  true  that  Origen 
frequently  quotes  the  Epistle  as  St.  Paul's,*  but  it  is  no 
less  evident  that  he  only  does  so  in  accordance  with 

^  Clem.  Alex.  Hypotyp.,  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  vi.  14.  Admnhratt.  \n  1 
Petr.,  p.  1007.     Clemens  was,  it  must  be  admitted,  somewhat  credulous. 

2  xiii.  18,  23. 

^  See  Bp.  Wordsworth's  surprisincr  remarks  on  this  subject.  The  unions 
of  great  learning  with  want  of  subtle  discemmeut  even  in  the  Alexandrian 
School  may  be  seen  in  their  acceptance  of  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  as  au- 
thentic in  spite  of  its  extravagant  allegorising  and  incipient  Gnosticism. 

*  Not  unfrequently,  however,  he  uses  the  phrase  Kara,  rhv  air6(TTo\ov. 
See  the  passages  in  Bleek's  Introduction. 


538  APPENDIX. 

common  custom,  and  that  by  such  casual  expressions  he 
as  little  intends  to  prejudge  the  question  of  authorship 
as  the  authors  of  the  Revised  Version,  who  still  retain 
the  name  of  St.  Paul  in  the  title.  A  modern  writer  who 
should  casually  happen  to  quote  "  the  Second  Epistle 
of  St.  Peter,"  or  popularly  to  refer  to  Ecclesiastes  as  a 
work  of  King-  Solomon,  would  have  a  right  to  feel  him- 
self aggrieved  if  such  a  general  reference  was  interpreted 
as  the  deliverance  of  a  final  and  critical  opinion.  Origen, 
like  Jerome  and  Augustine,  whenever  he  wishes  to  be 
accurate,  introduces  some  phrase  of  caution  which  indi- 
cates his  own  opinion.  We  know  what  he  thought  on 
the  subject,  for  he  wrote  Homilies  on  this  Epistle,  which 
are  now  unfortunately  lost,  but  of  which  one  or  two 
fragments  have  been  preserved  by  Eusebius.  In  these 
Ave  have  the  deliberate  conclusion  of  the  greatest  of  the 
Fathers.  "  That  the  character  of  the  style  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,"  he  says,  "  does  not  show  the 
uulearnedness  {to  ISlcotikovY  of  the  Apostle  who  confessed 
that  he  was  unlearned  in  word  (that  is  to  say,  in  lan- 
guage), but  that  the  Epistle  is  more  Hellenic  in  the 
structure  of  its  st3de,  everyone  would  admit  who  is 
capable  of  judging  the  differences  of  language  ;'  but,  on 
the  other  hand,  that  the  thoughts  of  the  Epistle  are 
wonderful,  and  not  inferior  to  the  acknowledged  apos- 
tolic writings,  ///rd  too  is  a  truth  which  ever}^  one  would 
acknowledge  who  attends  to  the  reading  of  the  apostolic 
works."  He  subsequently  attributes  the  tliouglits  to  the 
Apostle,  and  the  composition  to  some  one  who  made 

'  On  the  exact  import  of  this  word  see  my  Life  and  WorJc  of  St. 
Faul,  i.  106. 

'  'Otj  .  .  .  eiTTlvr]  'ErriffToK^  crvvdfcrfi  rrjs  \(^etiis  'EWrjviKwT^pa,  iruj  6  (iTiffrd- 
fjifvos  Kpivdv  (ppdaewv  5ia<popas  dfioAoyrjcrai  &i/.      (-^P-  Euseb.  M.  E.  vi.  25  ) 


ORIGEN.  539 

notes  of  what  the  Apostle  said.^  "  If,  then,"  he  con- 
cludes, "  any  Church  holds  this  Epistle  to  be  the  work 
of  St.  Paul,  let  it  be  congratulated  {evhoKLfieiTO))  even  for 
this,  since  it  was  not  without  some  grounds  that  ancient 
authorities  have  handed  it  down  as  Paul's.  But  who 
actually  wrote  it  God  only  knows.  The  historical  tradi- 
tion that  has  come  down  to  us  is  divergent :  for  some 
say  that  Clemens,  who  became  Bishop  of  the  Romans, 
VvTote  the  Epistle,  and  some  that  it  was  Luke,  who  also 
wrote  the  Gospel  and  the  Acts."" 

The  passage  is  expressed  somewhat  obscurely,  because 
(as  we  are  sorry  to  admit)  Origen,  with  all  his  courage, 
accepted  the  expediency  of  concession,  in  certain  cases, 
to  popular  ignorance  and  current  prejudice.  It  is  clear 
that  he  did  not  accept  the  Pauline  authorship  in 
the  ordinary  sense  of  the  word.  He  was  too  good  a 
scholar,  too  profound  a  student,  too  familiar  with 
the  niceties  of  Greek  expression,  and  too  unbiassed 
a  critic  not  to  perceive  that  the  "  style "  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  far  more  correct  than  that 
of  St.  Paul.  He  therefore  held  that  Clemens  of  Rome 
may  have  written  it,  or  that  it  might  be  attributed  to 
St.  Luke.  But  he  also  saw  that  it  came  from  the 
School  of  Paul ;  that  it  expresses  his  sentiments,  and  is, 

^  ^  Se  (jtpacns  kolL  t]  crvi/dfcns  a.Troiivr]fxovevffai'T6i  tivos  to,  airoffToXiKa  koI  wcrwepel 
(Txo\ioypa(pr\(TavTos  to,  ilpriixiva,  vi^h  tov  StSatr/cdAou.      (-4p    Euseb.  H.  E.  vi.  2.5.) 

^  This  limited  and  hesitating  expression  implies  that  the  Churches 
generally  rejected  this  opinion,  and  perhaps  that  it  prevailed  in  the 
Alexandrian  Church  alone.  Now  the  natural  tendency  would  so  absolutely 
be  to  ascribe  the  letter  to  St.  Paul,  and  the  grounds  for  doing  so,  if  taken 
apart  from  the  objections,  are  so  reasonable  {ovk  ek?))  that  the  fact  that 
until  this  view  became  stereotyped  there  were  many  who  rejected  it,  is  of 
itself  a  proof  how  strong  were  the  reasons  which  compelled  them  to  run 
counter  to  the  popular  inference.  The  general  laropia  was  against  the 
Pauline  authorship  :  the  local  irapd^ocris  was  for  it ;  and  even  this  was  pro- 
bably reducible  to  the  loose  opinion  of  Pautsenus. 


540  APPENDIX. 

so  to  speak,  quite  worthy  of  him.  This  is  why  he  does 
not  care  to  disturb  the  opinion  of  any  Church  which 
accepted  it,  and  says  that  "  the  ancient  authorities  " 
— under  which  term  he  vaguely  refers  to  Pantainus  and 
Clemens^ — had  not  been  guided  by  arbitrary  conjecture 
in  handing  down  a  tradition  of  its  Pauhne  origin. 

{d.)  The  opinion  of  Eusebius  of  Cesauea  is  no  less 
hesitating  and  wavering.  In  common  parlance  he  quotes 
the  Epistle  as  St.  Paul's,  but  he  too  was  well  aware 
that  it  did  not  belong  to  the  homologoumena.  He 
was  induced  by  the  style  to  conjecture  that  it  was 
a  translation  by  St.  Clemens  of  Rome  from  a  Hebrew 
original.^  He  does  indeed  say  in  one  place  that  there 
were  fourteen  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  this  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  had  its  place  as  Pauline  in  the  fifty 
manuscripts  of  the  Canonical  books  of  the  New 
Testament  which  he  caused  to  be  written  out  for  the 
Emperor  Constantine,  who  wished  to  place  them  in  the 
churches  of  his  new  capital.  The  example  of  Eusebius 
is  therefore  very  instructive.  Passage  after  passage 
might  be  adduced  from  his  writings  to  show  that  he 
accepted  the  Epistle  as  genuine ;  and  yet  when  he  is 
writing  definitely  and  accurately  he  says,  "  The  thirteen 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul  are  manifest  and  clear.  It  would 
not,  however,  be  fair  to  ignore  that  some  have  regarded 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  spurious  {rjderrjKaai),  saying 
that  it  is  opposed  {dvnXiryea-dai)  b}^  the  Church  of  Rome 
as  not  being  by  St.  Paul."  Popular  reference  is  one 
thing,  and  accurate  statement  is  another.  In  disputed 
questions  a  current  allusion  possesses  no  critical  impor- 

^  Hug  (Einleit.    ii.  317),    Delitzsch  (Hebr.   §    xvii.),    aud    Bleek    all 
exaggerate  the  meaning  of  these  expressions.     (See  Wieseler,  i.  17.) 
2  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  3,  38 ;  vi.  13. 


THE    HEBREWS    AND    PHILO.  541 

tance.  And  this  statement  of  Eusebius  is  remarkable  as 
showing-  that,  in  spite  of  the  general  truth  of  St.  Jerome's 
remark  that  "  all  the  Greeks  accept,"  there  were  some 
even  in  the  Grreek  Church  who  were  in  doubt  about  it/ 
Can  any  honest  man  read  this  review  of  the  early 
patristic  evidence  without  feeling  that  it  is  on  the 
whole  unfavourable  to  the  theory  of  the  Pauline  author- 
ship ? 


EXCUESUS    IX. 

MINOR   RESEMBLANCES    BETWEEN    THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE 
HEBREWS    AND    THE    WORKS    OF    PHILO. 

A  few  separate  instances  may  here  be  thrown  to- 
gether of  minor  points  of  contact  between  the  language 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  that  of  Philo  : — 

{a.)  In  iii.  7 — 15  the  writer  lays  great  stress  on  the 
word  " /o-f/r/^."  Philo  defines  "  to-day  "  as  "the  infi- 
nite and  interminable  seon,"  and  says  "  Till  to-day  ;  that 
is  for  ever."  ^ 

{b.)  In  ii.  6  he  quotes  from  a  Psalm  by  saying  that 
''one,  someiohere,  tedified'"  {jrovTii).  He  was  of  course 
aware  that  the  Psalm  is  assigned  to  David;  but  the 
same  vague  form  of  quotation  is  found  frequently  in 
Philo. 

(c.)  In  iii.  2  we  find  the  remark,  "  He  that  builded  the 
house  hath  more  honour  than  the  house.''  Philo  uses  the 
same  argument.^ 

'  We  learn  this  also  from  tlie  Iambics  of  Amphilocliiiis,  who  says  that 
Tives  rejected  it :   Ttves  5e  (pad  Ti]v  wphs  ^Efipaiovs  v6dov  ovk  ev  \iyovTis. 

2  Leg.  allegg.  iii.  8;  Deprofug.  §  11.     (Mangey,  i.  92,  554.) 

De  "plant.  Noe,  §  16  :  ocrw  6  KTrjaafxefos  tov  KT-fj/xaTos  afieiywv  koI  rh 
ireiroiriKbs  tov  yeyov6TOS. 


542  APPENDIX. 

(d.)  In  iv.  15  he  says  that  Christ  shared  in  all  our 
in^rmities,  " except  sin."  Philo  says  that  "the  High 
Priest  is  not  man,  but  the  Divine  Word,  free  from  all 
share  not  only  in  willing  but  even  in  involuntar}^ 
wrongdoing,"  ^  and  speaks  also  of  the  mercy  and  gentle- 
ness of  His  nature.^ 

(e.)  The  word  fierpioiradeiv — literally  "  to  stiff e?-  mode- 
rately"— in  V.  2  is  found  also  in  Philo,  though  it  does 
not  occur  in  the  Septuagint  or  elsewhere  in  the  New 
Testament. 

(/.)  In  vi.  5  he  speaks  of  "  tasting  the  utterance  of 
God."  Philo  speaks  of  the  utterance  {rhema)  as  well  as 
the  Word  {Logos)  of  God,  and  speaks  of  its  nourishing 
the  soul  like  manna.^ 

{g.)  In  vi.  13  we  have  the  distinctions  between  God's 
word  and  His  oath,  and  the  impossibility  of  His  swearing 
by  any  but  Himself.  We  find  in  Philo  the  same 
thought  and  the  same  expressions.* 

(Ji.)  In  vii.  17  the  High  Priest  is  said  (without  rigid 
accuracy)  to  offer  sacrifices  dailg.  Philo  uses  the  same 
expression.^ 

{i.)  In  ix.  16,  17  he  avails  himself  of  the  two  senses 
of  diatheke,  a  "  covenant "  and  a  "  will."  Philo  does 
the  same.'' 

{j.)  In  X.  3  he  speaks  of  sacrifices  involving  "  a  re- 
membrance of  sin."  Philo  says  that  the  sacrifices  of  the 
godless  do  not  work  a  remission,  but  a  remembrance  of 

1  Be  profwg.  §  20.     (Mang.  i.  563.) 

2  id.  §  18.     (Mang.  i.  559,  501.) 

'  De  profug.  §  25;  Leg.  allegg.  iii.  60.     (Mang.  i.  564,  120.) 
*  Leg.   allegg.  iii.  72;  De  Abrahmn.    §  46.     (Mang.  i.  128;  cf.  181, 
ii.  39.) 

'    De  spec.  leg.  §  23.      fvxas  koI  dvcias  tsAcDv  Kad'  fKacrrrjv  rjfifpav. 

«  Denom. mutat.  §  6.    (Mang.  i.  586.)   C£.  De  l<acr.  Abel.  (Mang.  i.  172.) 


"  SALEM."  543 

sin,  and  that  tliey  force  us  to  recall  our  ignorances  and 
transgressions.^ 

(Jc.)  In  xiii.  5  he  uses  the  quotation,  "  /  loill  never 
leave  thee  nor  forsake  thee."  In  that  form  the  words 
are  not  exactly/  found  in  Scripture,  but  Philo  quotes 
from  Scripture  in  the  same  words. '^ 


EXCUESUS    X. 

SALEM  "    AND    JERUSALEM. 


One  passage  alone  is  adduced  from  Scripture  in 
proof  that  Salem  may  be  used  as  a  shortened  poetical 
form  for  Jerusalem,  namely,  Ps.  Ixxvi.  2,  "  In  Salem 
also  is  his  tabernacle  and  his  dwelling-place  in  Zion." 
But  not  to  dwell  on  the  fact  that  this  can  only  be  a 
poetic  licence,  and  that  we  should  not  expect  to  find 
an  isolated  recurrence  of  it  in  a  plain  historic  narrative, 
the  meaning  of  that  verse  cannot  be  regarded  as  indis- 
putable. The  Psalmist  may  be  referring  to  the  Salem  of 
Melchizedek  as  a  different  place  from  Jerusalem.  Again, 
the  word  may  mean  "  peace ; "  and  both  the  LXX.  and  the 
Vulgate  render  it,  "  His  place  has  been  made  in  peace. "^ 
Besides  this,  in  the  days  of  Abraham,  and  for  centuries 
afterwards,  Jerusalem  was  only  known  by  the  name 
Jebus.^  But  though  the  Targums  render  Salem  by 
Jerusalem  in  this  passage  of  Grenesis,^  it  was  an  old  tra- 
dition that  the  Salem  intended  is  the  city  near  Shechem 

1  De  plant.  Noe,  §  25  ;  Devit.  Mos.  iii.  §  10.     (Mang.  i.  345,  ii.  246.) 
^  De  conf.  ling.  §  33,     ov  /it^  ae  dvw  ovS'  ov  firi  (Te  4yKara\inw.    (Maug.  i.  430.) 
^  LXX.   iyevrjdjj  eV  elprivri  6  r6Tros  avTov.      Vulg.,  "  Et  factus   est  in  pace 
locus  ejus." 

*  Judg.  xix.  10,  11,  &c. ;  2  Sam.  v.  6. 

*  So,  too,  Jos.  Antt.  i.  10,  §  2  x. 


544  APPENDIX. 

which  is  mentioDed  in  Gen.  xxxiii.  18  and  John  iii.  23.^ 
There  was  a  town  of  this  name  near  to  iEnon,^  and 
its  site  has  been  traditionally  preserved.  The  former 
passage  is  again  doubtful.  The  verse  is  rendered  by  the 
Targums,  by  Josephus,  and  by  many  eminent  scholars,^ 
not  "  Jacob  came  to  Shalem,  a  city  of  Shechem''  but 
"Jacob  came  in  safety  to  the  city  of  Shechem.''  The 
Samaritans  always  maintained  that  it  was  at  Gerizim 
that  Melchizedek  had  met  Abraham ;  and  St.  Jerome 
tells  us  that  the  most  learned  Jews  of  his  days 
regarded  this  town  as  the  Salem  of  Melchizedek,  and 
the  ruins  of  a  large  palace  were  shown  there  which 
was  called  the  Palace  of  Melchizedek.^  It  is  there- 
fore doubtful  whether  Jerusalem  is  intended,  espe- 
cially since  the  writer  touches  so  very  slightly  on 
the  name.  The  word  Salem^  means  rather  "  peace- 
ful"  than  "peace;"  and  hence  some  again  have  sup- 
posed that  "  peaceful  king "  was  a  title  of  Mel- 
chizedek,^ and  one  which  marked  him  out  still  more 
specially  as  a  type  of  the  Messiah ;  ^  but  this  is  a  late 
and  improbable  conjecture.  It  may,  however,  be  justly 
maintained  that  the  typical  character  of  Melchizedek 

^  It  is  mentioned  also  in  Judith  iv.  4. 

-  Jerome  says,  "  Salem  eivitas  Sieimornm  qiiae  estSicliem."  Itwould 
be  more  aceurate  to  say  that  it  was  near  Shechem.  He  places  it  eight 
miles  south  of  Bethshean  {Onom.  s.  v.  Ejo.  ad  Evang.  1).  The  ruined 
well  there  is  now  called  Sheikli  Salim  (Robinson,  Bibl.  Bes.  iii.  333). 

^  E.  g.,  Knobel,  Tuch,  Delitzsch,  and  Kalisch  on  Gen.  xxxiii.  18. 

*  Jer.  ad  Evagr.  See,  too,  the  tradition  presented  by  Eupolemos  {ap. 
Euseb.  Fraep.  Evang.  ix.  17),  that  Abram  was  entertained  at  Gerizim 
(Ewald  Gesch.  iii.  239;  Stanley,  Sin.  and  Pal,  p.  237). 

•^  In  Bereshith  Rabba  it  is  said  that  Melclii  Shalem  means  "  perfect 
king,"  .and  that  he  was  so  called  because  he  was  circumcised — referring  to 
Gen.  xvii.  1  (vide  Schottgcn,  ad  loc).  Philo  calls  him  "king  of  peace  (for 
that  is  the  meaning  of  Salem)  "  {Leg.  allegg.  iii.  2o). 

7  Is.  ix.  5  ;  Col.  i.  20,  etc. 


THE    ALTAR    OF    INCENSE.  545 

would  rather  be  impaired  than  enhanced  by  his  being 
a  king  of  Jerusalem.  For  Jerusalem  was  the  holy 
town  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood,  and  it  might  seem 
more  fit  that  the  Royal  Priest  should  have  been 
connected  with  some  other  sanctuary  as  a  type  of  Him 
in  Wliose  day  "  neither  in  this  mountain  nor  yet  in 
Jerusalem  should  men  worship  the  Father,"  but  should 
worship  Him  in  all  places  acceptably,  if  they  worshipped 
in  spirit  and  in  truth. 


EXCURSUS    XL 

THE    ALTAR    OF    INCENSE    AND    THE    HOLIEST    PLACE. 

The  altar  of  incense  (like  the  altar  of  burnt-offering) 
was  called  Holy  of  Holies  (Ex.  xxx.  10),  and  in 
Ex.  xxx.  6  ;  xl.  5,  it  is  expressly  said  to  be  placed 
"  before  the  mercy- seat,"  and  "  before  the  ark  of  the 
testimony."  From  its  very  close  connexion  with  the 
ceremony  of  the  Day  of  Atonement,  on  which  it  was 
(as  well  as  the  mercy-seat)  sprinkled  with  the  blood  of 
the  sin-offering  (Lev.  xvi.  18),  it  is  called  in  1  Kings 
vi.  22,  "  the  altar  that  is  by  the  oracle,"  or,  rather, 
"  which  belongs  to  the  oracle."  It  is  clear,  then,  (1) 
that  a  peculiar  sanctity  appertained  to  the  altar  beyond 
the  sanctity  of  the  other  things  which  were  in  the 
Holy  Place  ;^  and  (2)  that  its  position  was  close  to 
the  veil,  and  in  immediate  relation  to  the  position 
of  the  Ark,  of  which  it  seems  to  have  been  regarded 
as  an  appurtenance.  Even  on  these  grounds  the 
Holiest  might  be  generally  said  "  to  have  "  or  contain 

'  Incense  was  supposed  to  have  an  atoning  jiower  (Toma,  f .  44,  a ; 
Num.  xvi.  47). 

J  J 


546  APPENDIX. 

the  incense-altar.  But  then  (3)  it  must  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  writer  is  thinking  specially  of  the  Day 
of  Atonement,  and  on  that  day  the  inner  veil  was  lifted 
by  the  high  priest,  so  that  the  Holiest  and  the  Holy 
Place  might  (on  that  day)  be  regarded  as  a  single 
sanctuary,^  which  would  give  still  minuter  accuracy  to 
the  term  used.  Nor  is  this  a  mere  conjecture.  In 
the  vision  of  Isaiah  (vi.  1 — 8)  the  prophet  is  supposed 
to  be  standing  in  the  Holy  Place,  and  he  sees  the  Lord 
uplifted  on  His  throne  above  the  six- winged  Seraphim, 
just  as  the  Shechinah  was  supposed  to  rest  between 
the  out-stretched  wings  of  the  Cherubim  above  the 
mercy-seat.  Then  one  of  the  Seraphs  flies  from  the 
throne  with  a  live  coal  in  his  hand,  which  he  had  taken 
"from  off  the  altar."  Similarly,  in  the  vision  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse (viii.  1 — 5)  the  seer  sees  an  angel  with  a  golden 
censer,  to  whom  is  given  much  incense,  that  he  may 
offer  it  upon  "  the  golden  altar  ivhich  is  before  the  throne." 
In  these  considerations,  then,  we  may  fairly  see  the 
solution  of  the  difficulty.  The  writer  is  not  speaking 
with  pedantic  minuteness,  but  his  expression  is  justi- 
fiable, and  even  accurate  if  we  place  ourselves  in  his 
point  of  view,  and  imagine  that  we  are  looking  at  the 
Holy  and  the  Holiest  as  they  appeared  on  the  greatest 
day  of  the  Jewish  year.  But  though  he  has  made  no 
mis-statement,  he  comes  very  near  it,  and  it  is  clear 
that  St.  Paul  would  have  written  with  more  familiar 
accuracy  about  these  ritual  details. 

'  See  a  Pai^er  by  Prof.  Milligau,  in  the  Bible  Educator,  iii.  230. 


DAY   OF    ATONEMENT.  547 

EXCUESUS    XII. 

CEREMONIES  OF  THE  DAY  OE  ATONEMENT. 

At  earliest  dawn  the  High  Priest  chose  a  young 
bullock  for  a  sin-offering  and  a  lamb  for  a  burnt- 
offering  for  himself  and  his  house.  After  the  or- 
dinary ^  morning  service,  he  bathed  himself,  and  put 
on  his  holy  linen  garments  of  purest  white  and  of 
great  value."  Then  he  laid  his  hands  on  the  head 
of  the  young  bullock,  and  confessed  the  sins  of  him- 
self and  his  house.  He  next  took  two  kids  for  a  sin- 
offering  and  a  ram  for  a  burnt-offering  for  the  sins 
of  Israel,^  and  cast  lots  upon  them  at  the  entrance  of 
the  Tabernacle.  The  lots  were  drawn  from  a  golden 
urn  called  caJpi,  which  stood  in  the  Court  of  the 
Priests,  but  close  to  the  worshippers.  One  lot  was 
"  for  Jehovah,"  the  other  "  for  Azazel."  The  goat 
on  which  the  lot  for  Jehovah  fell  was  sacrificed 
for  a  sin-offering.  He  sacrificed  the  bullock  as  an 
atonement  for  himself  and  his  house,  and  the 
priesthood  in  general.  The  blood  of  the  bullock 
was  stirred  by  an  attendant  lest  it  should  coagulate. 
Then  came  the  most  awful  moment  of  all.  Filling 
a  censer  with  burning  coals  from  the  altar,  and 
his  hands  with  sweet  incense  beaten  small,  he  slowly 
approached  the  sanctuary,  and  in  his  white  robes 
entered  into  the  presence  of  God  through  the  veil  of 

^  All  these  bathings  were  done  in  a  special  golden  laver  in  a  little 
chamber  called  "  Happarveh,"  above  the  room  where  they  salted  the  hides 
of  the  victims  (Middoth  v.  2  ;  Surenhusius,  Mishnah,  v.  376  (quoted  by 
McCaul,  p.  155). 

'^  On  these  see  Toma,  iii.  7,  and  Edersheim,  The  Temple,  j).  266. 

^  Altogether  he  offered  fifteen  animals,  according  to  Maimonides  (see 
Lev.  xvi;  Num.  xxix.). 

J  J    2 


548  APPENDIX. 

the  Holiest  Place.  When  ho  did  so  he  was  accom- 
panied, the  liabbis  say,  by  throe  acolytes,  of  whom 
one  held  him  by  each  hand  and  the  other  by  the  jewels 
of  his  robe.  Entering  the  Holiest,  he  threw  the 
incense  on  the  burning  coals  of  the  censer,  that  the 
thick  and  fragrant  smoke  might  rise  in  a  clond 
between  him  and  the  mercy-seat.^  Through  the 
smoke,  he  sprinkled  the  blood  of  the  bullock  seven 
times  against  the  front  of  the  mercy-seat  and  in  front 
of  it.^  Then,  going  out  and  sacrificing  the  goat  for  the 
sins  of  Israel,  he  sprinkled  its  blood  in  the  same  manner 
on  the  mercy-seat,  thus  making  an  atonement  for  the 
Holy  Place  because  of  the  uncleanness  of  the  children  of 
Israel.  Going  forth  with  the  blood  of  the  bullock 
and  the  kid,  he  made  a  similar  atonement  for  the  great 
brazen  altar  of  burnt-offering,  the  horns  of  which  he 
sprinkled  with  the  blood  seven  times.  Altogether 
there  were  forty-three  sprinklings  of  the  blood,  and  the 
remainder  was  poured  away  at  the  base  of  the  great  altar. 
When  the  whole  priesthood  and  sanctuary  were  thus 
cleansed  he  brought  the  live  goat  to  the  door  of  the 
Tabernacle,  and,  laying  both  his  hands  upon  its  head, 
confessed  over  it  all  the  iniquities,  transgressions,  and 
sins  of  the  people,  and  sent  the  goat  to  carry  those 
sins  away  into  the  wilderness,  into  a  land  not  inhabited, 
and  thus  to  free  the  consciences  of  the  worshippers 
from  the  sense  of  unforgiven  guilt.  Divesting  himself 
of  the  holy  linen  garments,  which  he  left  in  the  Holy 

^  This  somewhat  mysterioas  proceeding  arose  from  the  dispute  between 
the  Sadduceos  and  Pharisees,  in  wliich  the  former  maintained  that  the 
ineenso  should  bo  kindled  before  the  High-Priest  actually  entered  the  Holy 
Place,  whereas  the  Halachah  required  that  it  should  be  done  after  he 
entered. 

-  See  Knobel  on  LeA*.  xvi.  11. 


DAY    OF    ATONEMENT.  549 

Place,  and  which  were  never  to  be  worn  iiyain,  he  once 
more  bathed,  probably  in  the  Court  of  the  Tabernacle,^ 
and,  putting  on  his  glorious  apparel  of  purple  and 
gold  and  fine  linen,  with  its  bells  and  pomegranates 
and  rich  embroider}^,  he  came  forth  and  offered  the 
burnt-offerings  for  himself  and  the  people,  and  burnt 
the  fat  of  the  sin-offering.^ 


EXCUESUS    XIII. 

IMPRESSIONS    LEFT    ON    THE    MINDS    OF    THE    JEWS    BY    THE 
CEREMONIES    OF    THE    DAY    OF    ATONEMENT. 

We  can  trace  in  Jewish  literature  how  powerful  was 
the  impression  which  this  day  and  its  ritual  had  made 
upon  the  Jewish  imagination. 

Thus,  in  the  Book  of  Ecclesiasticus,  after  more 
briefly  mentioning  the  other  worthies  and  heroes  of 
Jewish  history,  the  writer  lingers  longest  and  most 
lovingly  on  the  glorious  figure  of  the  High  Priest  Simon, 
the  son  of  Onias,  as  he  appeared  on  the  great  Day  of 
Atonement — 

"  How  was  he  honoured  in  the  midst  of  the  people  in  his  coming 
out  of  the  sanctuary  !  He  was  as  the  morning  star  in  the  midst  of 
a  cloud,  and  as  the  moon  at  the  full  ;  as  the  sun  shining  upon  the 
Temple  of  the  Most  High,  and  as  the  rainbow  giving  light  in  tLe 
bright  clouds.  .  .  .  As  fire  and  incense  in  the  censer,  and  as  a 
vessel  of  beaten  gold  set  with  all  manner  of  precious  stones. 
When  he  put  on  the  robe  of  honour,  and  was  clothed  with  the 
perfection  of  glory,  when  he  went  up  to  the  holy  altar,  he  made  the 

'  Lev.  xvi.  2-t,  wliifli  should  be  rendered  "  in  a ''  (not  the)  Holy  Place, 
as  ill  vi.  16. 

-'  I  have  omitted  some  of  the  less  certain  minutiae.  These  may  be 
found  in  Dr.  Edersheim's  Temple  and  its  Services,  eliap.  xvi. 


550  APPENDIX. 

garment  of  holiness  honourable.  When  he  took  the  portions  out 
of  the  priests'  hands  he  himself  stood  by  the  hearth  of  the  altar 
compassed  with  his  brethren  round  about,  as  a  young  cedar  in 
Lebanon,  and  as  palm-trees  compassed  they  him  round  about.  So 
were  all  the  sons  of  Aaron  in  their  glory,  and  the  oblations  of  the 
Lord  in  their  hands,  before  all  the  congregations  of  Israel.  And 
finishing  the  service  at  the  altar,  that  he  might  adorn  the  offering  of 
the  Most  High  Almighty,  he  stretched  out  his  hand  to  the  cup,  and 
poured  of  the  blood  of  the  grape,  he  poured  out  at  the  foot  of  the 
altar  a  sweet-emelling  savour  unto  the  Most  High  King  of  all. 
Then  shouted  the  sons  of  Aaron,  and  sounded  the  silver  trumpets, 
and  made  a  gi'eat  noise  to  be  heard  for  a  remembrance  before  the 
Most  High."' 

Five    chapters    earlier  lie  lias    dwelt  with    similar 
enthusiasm  on  the  person  of  Aaron — 

"  He  exalted  Aaron,  a  holy  man  like  unto  him  (Moses),  even 
his  brother  of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  An  everlasting  covenant  he  made 
with  him,  and  gave  him  the  priesthood  among  the  people  ;  he  beauti- 
fied him  with  comely  ornaments,  and  clothed  him  with  a  robe  of 
glory.  He  put  upon  him  perfect  glory,  and  strengthened  liim  with 
rich  garments,  with  hosen,  with  a  long  robe,  and  the  ephod.  And  he 
compassed  him  with  pomegranates,  and  with  many  golden  bells  round 
about,  that  as  he  went  there  might  be  a  sound,  and  a  noise  made 
that  might  be  heard  in  the  Temple,  for  a  memox-ial  to  the  children 
of  his  people ;  with  a  holy  garment  and  gold,  with  blue  silk  and 
purple,  the  work  of  the  embroiderer,  with  a  breastplate  of  judgment, 
and  with  TJrini  and  Thummim,  with  twisted  scarlet,  the  work  of  the 
cunning  workman,  with  precious  stones  graven  like  seals,  and  set  in 
gold.  .  .  .  He  set  a  crown  of  gold  upon  the  mitre,  wherein  was 
engraved  Holiness^  an  ornament  of  honour,  a  costly  work,  the  desires 
of  the  eyes,  goodly  and  beautiful.  Before  him  there  were  none  such, 
neither  did  any  stranger  put  them  on,  but  only  his  children,  and  his 
children's  children  perpetually.  Their  sacrifices  shall  be  wholly 
consumed  every  day,  twice  continually.  Moses  consecrated  him, 
and  anointed  him  with  holy  oil :  this  was  appointed  unto  him  by  an 
everlasting  covenant,  and  to  his  seed  so  long  as  the  heavens  should 
remain.  .  .  .  He  chose  him  out  of  all  men  living  to  offer  sac- 
rifices to  the  Lord,  incense,  and  a  sweet  savour,  for  a  memorial,  to 

1  Ecclus.  1.  5—16. 


DAT   OF    ATONEMENT.  551 

make  reconciliation  for  his  people.  He  gave  unto  him  his  com- 
mandments, and  authority  in  the  statutes  of  his  judgments,  that  he 
should  teach  Jacob  the  testimonies,  and  inform  Israel  in  his  laws."^ 

Nor  did  tliese  intense  feelings  of  admiration  grow  less 
keen  as  time  advanced.  To  the  Jew  of  the  days  of  our 
Lord,  the  High  Priest — degraded  as  was  his  office  by  the 
vice  and  violence  and  unspiritual  greed  of  its  Sadducean 
representatives^ — was  still  the  most  memorable  figure  of 
all  his  nation ;  and  even  their  princes — a  Herod  of 
Chalcis,  and  a  Herod  Agrippa — thought  it  no  small 
enhancement  of  their  dignities  if  they  received  from  the 
Romans  the  special  prerogative  of  keeping  the  "  golden 
robes  "  of  the  great  Day  of  Atonement.  Nothing  more 
nearly  precipitated  the  civil  war  which  ultimately  ruined 
the  fortunes  of  Judaism  than  the  attempt  of  the  Romans 
to  hold  the  Jews  under  entire  subjection  by  keeping 
these  robes  under  their  own  control,  and  so  having  the 
power  to  hinder,  if  they  chose,  the  one  ceremony  on 
which  the  national  well-being  was  believed  most  imme- 
diately to  depend. 

Even  long  centuries  after  the  observances  of  Judaism 
had  become  impossible,  Maimonides,  in  his  Yad  Ila- 
chazakah,  carefully  preserves  for  us  all  the  traditional 

1  Ecclus.  xlv.  6—22. 

2  The  high-priestly  duties  were  not  only  severe,  but  would  be  most 
trying,  and  even  revolting,  to  any  one  who  was  not  animated  by  deep 
religious  feelings.  When  the  tract  Pesachim  (f .  1 13,  a),  lays  down  the 
rule,  "  flay  a  carcase,  and  take  thy  fee,  hut  say  not  it  is  humiliating, 
because  I  am  a  priest,  I  am  a  great  man  ;"  this  is  doubtless  a  reminiscence 
of  the  days  when  families  like  the  Boethusim  were  only  anxious  to  have 
hcul  the  dignity,  and  so,  like  modem  aldermen,  to  "  pass  the  chair."  The 
Rabbis  long  remembered  with  scorn  and  indignation  the  High-priest 
Issachar  Kephar  Barkai,  who  had  silh  gloves  made  for  himself,  that  he 
should  not  soil  his  hands  with  the  sacrifices  !  (Kerithoth,  f.  28  b)  and 
Elazar  Ben  Charsom,  who  wore  a  coat  worth  20,000  minas.  so  thin  that 
his  brother-priests  forbade  its  use  (Yoma,  f.  35  h). 


652  APPENDIX. 

precepts  of  the  Day  of  Atonement — the  fifteen  sacrificial 
victims,  the  fumigation  and  cleaning  of  the  lamps  by 
the  High  Priest,  the  seven  days'  seclusion,  the  sprink- 
ling of  his  person  on  the  third  and  seventh  day  with  the 
ashes  of  a  heifer;  the  daily  rehearsal  of  all  the  rites 
which  he  had  to  perform,  the  disputes  between  the  Sad- 
ducees  and  the  Pharisees  about  the  minutiae  of  the  da}'' ; 
the  five  baths  and  ten  washings  of  consecration  on  the 
day  itself;  the  utterance  ten  times  of  the  full  name  of 
God  ;  the  reason  why  the  name  was  pronounced  in 
an  almost  inaudible  recitative :  the  sprinkling  of  the 
blood  once  above  and  seven  times  below  the  mercy-seat, 
which  was  traditionally  developed  into  forty-three  sprink- 
lings ;  the  watch-towers  and  signals  by  which  it  was 
indicated  that  the  goat  "  for  Azazel "  had  reached  the 
wilderness ;  the  reading  and  reciting  by  memory  as  he 
sat  in  the  Com-t  of  the  Women  in  his  priestly  robes  ; 
the  tying  of  the  scarlet  cloth  round  the  goat's  horns  ;  ^ 
the  washing  of  hands  and  feet  in  golden  bowls ;  and 
the  multitude  of  the  details  to  which  the  nation  clung 
with  fond  devotion  as  representing  the  culminating 
splendour  of  the  ritual  with  which  they  connected  all 
their  hopes  of  forgiveness. 

It  may  be  said  that  even  now  the  impression  of  this 
high-priestly  splendour  on  the  great  day  (Yoma)  is  not 
exhausted.  In  the  festival  prayers  still  read  for  that 
day  we  read — 

"  Even  as  the  expanded  canopy  of  heaven  was  the  countenance 
of  the  Priest." 

"  As  the  splendour  whicli  proceedeth  from  the  effulgence  of 
Angels  was  the  countenance  of  the  Priest." 

He  is  compared  to  "  the   appearance  of  the  bow  in  the 

'  Yoma,  f .  66  b. 


JOHN   THE   PRESBYTER.  553 

midst  of  the  clouds ;  "  to  '*  a  rose  in  the  midst  of  a 
garden ; "  to  "  a  garden  of  roses  in  the  midst  of 
thorns;"  to  "a  star;"  to  "the  golden  bells  in  the 
skirts  of  the  mantle  ;  "  to  "  the  sunrise ;  "  to  "  the 
congregation  covered  with  blue  and  purple ;  "  and  to 
"  the  likeness  of  Orion  and  the  Pleiades."  ^ 


EXCUESUS  XIV. 

THE    IDENTITY    OF    "  JOHN    THE    PRESBYTER "    WITH     "  JOHN 
THE    APOSTLE." 

The  majority  of  those  who  have  questioned  the 
authenticity  of  the  Apocalypse  have  assigned  it  to  a 
supposed  younger  contemporary  of  the  Apostle,  who, 
they  say,  was  known  in  the  early  Church  as  "  John  the 
Presbyter."  If  it  can  be  shown  that  the  very  existence 
of  "  John  the  Presbyter  "is  in  the  highest  degree  prob- 
lematical, great  additional  force  will  be  given  to  the 
already  strong  proofs  that  the  Apocalypse,  the  Grospel, 
and  the  Epistles  are  indeed  the  work  of  the  Evangelist 
St.  John.  In  recent  times  the  supposed  existence  of 
this  "  nebulous  Presbyter  "  has  been  made  an  excuse 
for  denj'ing  altogether  the  work  and  the  residence  of 
St.  John  in  Asia.^ 

^  See  Hershon,  Treasures  of  the  Talmud,  p.  200. 

^  Yogel,  Der  Evang.  Johannes,  1800.  Liitzelbergei',  Die  hirchl.  Tradi- 
tion iiber  d.  Ap.  Johannes,  1840.  Keim,  Gesch.  Jesu  von  Nazara,  vol.  i., 
p.  160,  if.  Scholteu,  Ber  Ap.  Johan.  in  Klein-Azi'e,  1871.  Holtzmaun, 
Eph.  und  Kolosser-briefe,  1872.  On  the  other  side  see  W.  G-rimm,  Johannes, 
in  Ersch  and  Griiber.  Baur,  Gesch.  d.  christl.  Klrche,Tol.  i.-i^p.  82 — 147, 
etc.  Krcnkel,  Der  Apost.  Johannes,  pp.  133 — 178.  Strauss,  Schwegler, 
Zeller,  Hilgeufeld,  even  Volkmar  all  reject  the  new  theory.  Eeuan 
{L'Antechrist,  ])p.  557 — 589)  only  thinks  that  Scholteu  has  succeeded  in 
relegating  the  facts  to  a  sort  of  penumbra. 


554  APPENDIX. 

I  have  long  doubted  whether  there  ever  was  such  a 
person  as  this  "  John  the  Presbyter,"  and  I  had 
arrived  at  this  conclusion,  and  arranged  my  reasons  for 
holding  it,  before  I  saw  the  paper  of  Prof.  Milligan 
in  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature  for  October,  1868.^ 
The  papers  of  Riggenbach  {Jahrh.filr  deutsche  TJieologie, 
vol.  xiii.  p.  319),  and  of  Zahn  in  the  Studien  und  Kritiken 
for  1866,  I  have  not  yet  seen,  nor  Zahn's  Acta  Johannis 
(1880)."  I  have  purposely  abstained  from  consulting 
them  in  order  that  I  might  state  my  argument  in 
my  own  way  and  as  it  occurred  to  myself.  It  will  have 
been  useful  if  it  helps  in  ever  so  small  a  degree  to  get 
rid  of  "a  shadow  which  has  been  mistaken  for  a 
realit}^,"  "  a  sort  of  Sosia  of  the  Apostle,  who  troubles 
like  a  spectre  the  whole  history  of  the  Church  of 
Ephesus."^ 

The  question  of  the  separate  existence  of  a  "  John 
the  Presbyter"  turns  mainly  upon  the  meaning  of  a 
passage  of  Papias,  quoted  by  Eusebius,  and  upon  the 
criticism  of  that  passage  by  Eusebius  himself. 

Let  us  first  see  the  passage  of  Papias. 

In  his  Ejspositwn  of  Oracles  of  the  Lord  {Aojiwv 
KvptaKwv  i^^TjCTi^)  Papias  had  assigned  to  himself  the 
task  of  preserving  with  his  best  diligence  and  accuracy, 
and  of  interweaving  in  his  five  books,  the  apostolic 
traditions  which  were  still  attainable. 

"  I  shall  not  scruple^  he  says,  "  to  place  side  hy  side 
with  my  interpretations  all  the  things  that  I  ever  rightly 
learned  from  the  Elders  and  rightly  rememhered,  solemnly 

1  I  differ  from  Prof.  Milligan  in  liis  iuterpretation  of  the  meaning  of 
Papias. 

^  Subsequently  to  writing  this  paper  I  have  read  Zahn. 
3  Renan,  TJ Ardechrist,  p.  xxiii. 


JOHN    THE    PRESBYTER.  555 

ajjirming  their  frutJifdnessJ"  Then,  after  telling  us  that, 
unlike  most  men,  he  was  indifferent  to  idle  gossip  and 
secondhand  information,  and  sought  for  direct  evidence 
as  to  the  words  of  Christ,  he  adds :  "  but  if  at  any  time 
any  one  came  who  had  been  acquainted  with  the  Elders,  I 
used  to  enquire  about  the  discourses  of  the  Elders — luhat 
Andreio  or  ivhat  Peter  said  {ehrev),  or  what  Thomas  or 
James,  or  what  John  or  Matthew,  or  any  one  of  the  dis- 
ciples of  the  Lord ;  and  lohat  Aristion  and  John  the  Elder, 
the  disciples  of  the  Lord,  say  {Xe'yova-i).  For  I  thought  that 
the  information  derived  from  books  loould  not  be  so  pro- 
fitable to  me,  as  that  derived  from  a  living  and  abiding 
utterance."^ 

The  general  meaning  of  this  passage  is  clear.  The 
good  Bishop  of  Hierapolis  tells  us  that  he  wished,  in 
setting  forth  his  "  interpretations,"  to  derive  all  the 
information  he  could  from  the  fountain  head.  We  learn 
from  St.  Luke  himself  that,  before  he  wrote  his  Grospel, 
many  had  already  attempted  to  perform  a  similar  task, 
and  the  Evangelist  evidently  implies  that  he  was  dis- 
satisfied with  the  majority  of  these  efforts.  It  is  a  fair 
inference  from  the  expressions  which  he  uses  that  some 
of  these  narratives  were  founded  on  insufficient  know- 
ledge, and  were  lacking  in  carefulness.  It  is  possible 
that  these  tentative  sketches  of  the  Gospel  narrative — 
all  of  which  have  now  perished — admitted  apocryphal 

^  As  the  question  turns  on  the  meaning  of  this  passage,  I  ajipond  the 

Greek.  ovk  hnvitaoi  Sf  coi  koI  oaa  ttotc  Trapa  ruiv  irpeff^vTepoov  KaXcis  e/j.adou  Kai 
KaAcos  fiJ.vriiJ.ivev(ra  ffvyKaToi^at  Ta7s  tpfirivfiais  Sia^f^aiovfxeuos  inrep  aiircov  a\rj9eLai>. 
El  5e  vov  Koi  irapaKo\ov9riKdos  tis  toTs  Trpicr^vrtpois  eKdoi  rovs  twv  irpfcr^vrfpui' 
aviKpivov  K6yoiis'  ri  'AvSpeas  ^  ti  Tlerpos  elirev  tj  ti  ^'iKimros  ^  ri  'loiavvris  tj 
MarBalos,  i)  rls  tu>v  Kvpiov  naOriToof,  art  ^Apicrriwv  Kcd  6  Trpffffivrepos  ^loidwrii  oi 
rov  Kvpiov  /nadrjTal  hiyovaiv.  Oh  yap  to.  iK  tSiv  ^iISKlccv  t4(Tovt6v  fie  w<p€\f7i' 
{/■KiXapiRavov,   ocrov    to.  Trapa.  (^war^s    <poot'ris    Ka\    /.ifvovcrrjs. — Papias,    ap.    Euscb. 

II.  E.  iii.  39. 


556  APPENDIX. 

particulars  or  narrated  true  circumstances  with  erroneous 
details.  Such  documents  would  be  sure  to  contain  some 
contradictions,  and  would  create  much  uncertainty  in 
the  minds  of  Christians.  The  Four  Gospels  were  written 
in  fulfilment  of  an  imperative  need.  Now  if  imperfect 
or  unauthorised  works,  such  as  the  sketches  to  which 
St.  Luke  alludes,  had  come  under  the  notice  of  Papias, 
he  would  naturally  regard  them  with  suspicion,  and 
would  feel  that  their  uncertainties  discredited  their 
authority.  He  was  indeed  acquainted  with  the  Grospels 
of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark,  and  perhaps,  though  I  do 
not  think  that  this  can  be  regarded  as  certain,  with  the 
Grospel  of  St.  John.^  But  stories  were  floating  about, 
such,  for  instance,  as  that  respecting  the  death  of  Judas 
Iscariot,  and  that  about  "  a  woman  accused  before  our 
Lord  of  many  sins,"  which  diverged  more  or  less  from 
the  accounts  in  the  Gospels.  Papias  felt  that  he  would 
be  rendering  a  service  to  the  Church  if  he  collected  from 
eye-witnesses  all  the  authentic  information  which  could 
still  be  gathered  as  to  facts.  It  was  even  more  impor- 
tant to  him  and  to  the  Church  to  learn  the  accurate 
truth  about  asserted  doctrines.  If  "  the  books  "  to  which 
he  refers  included,  as  Bishop  Lightfoot  has  conjectured," 
some  of  the  mj'stic  heresies  and  absurdities  of  the 
early  Gnostics,  they  fully  deserved  the  tone  of  deprecia- 
tion in  which  he  speaks  of  them.  He  was  acting  wisely 
in  endeavouring  to  bring  to  a  focus  the  last  glimmerings 
of  direct  Apostolic  tradition, 

^  Eusebius  does  not  quote  any  allusion  of  Papias  to  the  Gospel  of  St. 
John,  but  in  an  argument  prefixed  to  a  Vatican  MS.  of  the  ninth  century, 
wo  arc  told  that  ho  testified  to  its  genuineness;  and  a  quotation  from  "  the 
Elders,"  in  Irenaeus,  rtiay  be  derived  from  Papias.  Westcott,  On  the  Canon, 
p.  77.     It  must  be  admitted  that  this  evidence  is  somewhat  shadowy. 

2  Contemporary  Review,  August,  18G7,  and  August,  1875. 


PAPIAS.  557 

It  seems  then  that  he  had  long  been  in  the  habit — 
perhaps  ever  since  his  early  youth — of  gleaning  from 
every  available  source  the  testimony  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles.  His  book  was  probably  written  after  the  last 
Apostle  was  dead,  and  he  considered  that  it  owed  much 
of  its  importance  to  the  old  traditions  which  he  had 
gathered  while  it  was  yet  possible  to  do  so.  In  the 
passage  which  I  have  quoted  he  is  not  speaking  of 
present  times,  but  is  referring  to  what  he  used  to  do  in 
the  days  of  his  youth  and  early  manhood. 

Now  certainly  if  Papias  had  been  a  careful  modern 
writer  we  should  have  inferred  from  this  passage  that 
the  John  mentioned  in  the  first  clause  was  a  different 
person  from  the  John  mentioned  in  the  second.  In  the 
first,  he  says,  that  it  had  been  his  habit  to  enquire  from 
any  who  had  known  "the  Elders" — of  whom  he 
especially  mentions  seven  Apostles — what  these  "Elders" 
said ;  and  also  "  what  Aristion  and  John  the  Elder,  the 
disciples  of  the  Lord,  scit/." 

But  although  this  would  be  the  natural  inference, 
it  is  by  no  means  the  certain  inference.  The  antithesis 
may  be  between  the  past  and  present  tense  ("said" 
and  "say"),  and  not  between  two  sources  of  original 
information.  There  is  nothing  to  forbid  the  explana- 
tion that  when  Papias  met  any  one  who  had  known 
the  immediate  Apostles  and  disciples  of  the  Lord — 
St.  John  among  them — he  made  notes  of  what  (accord- 
ing to  his  informant)  these  Elders  said ;  but  in  writing 
this  clause  he  remembers  that,  at  the  time  when  he  was 
making  his  notes,  two  of  the  immediate  disciples  of  the 
Lord  were  not  dead  but  living  ;  namely,  Aristion — to 
whom,  since  he  was  not  an  Apostle,  he  does  not  give  the 
direct  title  of  "Elder" — and  John,  whom  he  identifies 


558  APPENDIX. 

with  those  whom  he  has  mentioned  in  the  first  clause 
by  calling"  him,  as  he  had  called  them,  "  the  Elder." 

Certainly  such  a  way  of  expressing  himself  would 
show  that  Papias  was  a  man  who  wrote  in  a  very  simple 
and  loose  style ;  but  this  is  exactly  what  we  know  to 
have  been  the  case.  It  is  true  that,  in  one  place,  if  the 
clause  be  genuine,  Eusebius  calls  him  "  a  man  in  all 
respects  of  the  greatest  erudition  and  well  acquainted 
with  Scripture."  ^  But  the  genuineness  of  this  eulo- 
gistic clause  is  very  uncertain,  since  it  is  omitted  in 
several  manuscripts,  as  well  as  by  Eufinus,  and  (which 
is  important)  in  an  ancient  Syriac  Version.  Three 
chapters  further  on  Eusebius  tells  us  that  Papias  was  "  a 
man  of  exceedingly  small  intelligence,  as  one  may  infer 
from  his  own  writings."  ^  Such  a  man  might  easily 
write  in  a  confused  stjde.  One  at  least  of  the  passages 
which  Eusebius  quotes  from  the  E.vjmsition  bears  out 
his  unfavourable  opinion  of  the  ancient  bishop's  ability. 
Nor  are  we  left  to  form  our  judgment  of  his  style  solely 
on  the  opinion  of  Eusebius.  Another  of  the  passages 
which  the  historian  quotes  from  Papias  (and  to  which  I 
have  referred  further  on)  is  equally  wanting  in  precision, 
and  is  therefore  susceptible  of  more  than  one  interpre- 
tation. 

I.  Now,  first  of  all,  no  difficulty  can  arise  as  to  the 
title  given  to  St.  John.  Papias  calls  all  the  other 
Apostles  "  the  Elders,"  and  it  is  only  natural  to  assume 
that  he  gives  the  same  title  to  St.  John  in  the  same 
sense.  The  word  "Elder,"  like  the  word  "Apostle," 
had  two  different  senses.     In  its  ordinary  sense  it  was 

'   av^f  TO  -KavTo.  on  /uaAnrra  X07106TOTOS.     Eusol).  H.  E.  ill.  36. 

2  (T(p6Spa  (TfiiKphs  iiv  rhv  vovv  ws  hv  in  rwv  outoO  X6ywv  TtKfJ.ijpdfj.fvot>  eiitfiv. 

Id.  iii.  39. 


"  ELDER."  559 

applicable  to  many  hundreds  of  persons,  for  it  meant  any 
Christian  who  was  member  of  a  Presbytery.  But  it  had 
a  special  sense,  in  which  it  meant  one  who  belonged  to 
the  earliest  generation  of  Christians.  In  this  sense  it  is 
constantly  used  by  Irenseus,  and  is  applied  to  Papias 
himself,  though  he  was  not  a  Presbyter  but  a  Bishop  of 
Hierapolis,  and  though  by  the  time  of  Irenajus  the  dis- 
tinction between  "  Bishop  "  and  "  Presbyter,"  which  is 
not  found  in  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament,  had 
been  gradually  introduced.  If  the  Second  and  Third 
Epistles  of  St.  John  be,  as  the  Church  has  generally 
inferred,  by  the  same  author  as  the  First,  the  case  is 
strengthened  for  identifying  "John  the  Elder"  with 
"  John  the  Apostle,"  for  in  both  those  Epistles  St.  John 
gives  himself  this  very  title.  That  it  was  in  no  sense 
inappropriate  may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  St.  Peter, 
in  addressing  Elders,  calls  himself  their  "  fellow  Elder."  ^ 
Besides  this,  when  used  with  the  definite  article,  it 
would  be  a  title  of  great  significance,  and  yet  would 
accord  with  the  modesty  and  reticence  which  were 
habitual  with  St.  John.  There  was  no  need  for  the  last 
survivor  of  the  Apostles  to  give  himself  the  title  of 
"  Apostle,"  to  which,  in  its  loftiest  sense,  all  men  knew 
that  he  had  an  undisputed  claim.  He  did  not  wish  to 
assert  his  own  immense  authority.  But  in  calling  him- 
self "  the  Elder "  he  used  a  term  doubly  impressive. 
He  implies  that  he  was  an  Elder  in  a  peculiar  sense,  both 
because  he  was  entitled  from  his  great  age  to  respect 
and  reverence,  and  also  because  he  was  raised  above  the 
rest  of  Elders  by  the  dignity  of  his  position  as  the  last 
of  the  Twelve,  and  the  last  of  those  who  could  say  "  I 
have  seen  the  Lord."    So  far,  then,  Ave  see  that,  whether 

1  1  Pet.  V.  1. 


560  APPENDIX. 

they  were  the  same  person  or  not,  the  John  in  the  first 
clause  and  the  John  in  the  second  are  each  characterised 
by  two  identical  titles.  Each  is  called  an  "  Elder,"  and 
each  is  called  "  a  disciple  of  the  Lord."  Surely  if  Papias 
had  wished  to  describe  two  different  persons  he  would 
have  given  some  separate  and  distinctive  title  to  the 
second  and  inferior  John.  It  is  a  reasonable  inference 
that  Papias  is  only  mentioning  the  same  person  twice 
over  in  an  intelligible,  though  loose  and  inartistic  way, 
to  distinguish  between  reports  of  his  sayings  which  were 
brought  to  him  when  St.  John  was  yet  living  and  after 
he  was  dead. 

But,  besides  this,  I  am  far  from  sure  that  the  sen- 
tence is  not  loosely  constructed  in  another  sense.  By 
the  figure  of  speech  called  zeugma,  or  rather,  syllepsis, 
the  same  word,  even  in  the  most  classical  writers  and  in 
all  languages,  is  often  made  to  serve  two  purposes  in  the 
same  sentence.  A  verb  is  often  used  with  two  clauses 
which  is  only  appropriate  to  one  of  them,  as  in  Pope's 
line — 

"  See  Pan  with  flocks,  with  fruits  Pomona  crowned," 

where  from  the  participle  "  crowned  "  we  must  under- 
stand the  word  "  surrounded  "  to  suit  the  first  half  of 
the  line.  In  other  instances  we  are  compelled  by  the 
sense  to  borrow  from  one  verb  another  which  may  be 
even  opposite  in  meaning,  as  in  St.  Paul's — 

KtiiKv6vToiv  yaiJ.f'iv,  d7re;;^6«r6ai  Ppwfidruv.^ 

"  Forbidding  to  marry,  [commanding]  to  abstain  from 
meats,"  where  from  kcoXvovtwv  (forbidding)  we  must  under- 

'   1  Tim.  iv.  3,  COmp.  yiXa  u/uuj  inSTia-a  ov  Ppwfua,  1  Cor.  iii.  2. 


P  API  AS.  561 

stand  KeXevovrcov  (commanding)  to  suit  the  second  clause.^ 
It  is  then  perfectly  legitimate  to  understand  Papias  to 
mean  that  he  used  to  enquire  what  Peter,  John,  etc.  said, 
and  when  opportunity  occurred  used  to  make  personal  notes 
of  what  Aristion  and  John  sai/.^  What  he  derived  from 
St.  John  would,  if  such  were  his  meaning,  have  been  of 
two  descriptions,  namely,  (1)  Reports  of  his  conversations 
from  others,  and  (2)  Actual  notes  of  his  living  testi- 
mony taken  down  in  intercourse  with  the  Apostle  him- 
self when  Papias  was  young.  And  that  Eusebius  is  not 
guilty  of  mere  carelessness  in  interpreting  him  to  mean 
that  he  actually  heard  "John  the  Elder"  is,  T  think, 
shown  by  the  words  which  follow,  in  which  Papias, 
thinking  mainly  of  his  last  clause,  speaks  of  the  impor- 
tance of  the  "  living  and  abiding  voice."  Indeed,  he  says 
in  his  opening  sentence  that  some  of  his  notes  were 
derived  from  immediate  intercourse  with  some  of  these 
"Elders"  as  well  as  {elhe  Ka\  k.t.X.)  from  trustworthy 
reports  of  what  they  had  said  to  others. 

There  are,  then,  two  strong  arguments  for  construing 
the  sentences  of  Papias  as  I  have  here  proposed.  They 
are  all  the  stronger  because  they  are  both  derived  from 
Eusebius  himself,  though  he  may  be  called  the  original 
inventor  of  the  theory  about  "  John  the  Presbyter."  ^ 

(1.)  One  of  these  arguments  is  that  Eusebius  so  con- 
strued the  sentence.  He  indeed  makes  "  John  the 
Elder  "  of  the  first  clause  a  different  person  from  the 
"John  the  Elder"  of  the  second  clause;  but  he  para- 

'  This  is  called  zeugma ;  iu  syllepsis  the  same  woi'cl  is   taken  in  two 

different  senses. 

-  'AvaKpivoi  means  "I  examine,"  "  sift,"  or  "  question." 

•'  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  had  given  a  timid  hint  that  there  might 

have  l)een  such  a  person,  but  Eusebius,  by  a  bold  criticism,  assumes  that 

tliore  was. 

k   k 


562  APPENDIX. 

phrases  the  sentence  thus  :  "  Papias  testifies  that  he  had 
received  the  sayings  of  the  Apostles  from  those  who  had 
been  acquainted  with  them,  but  says  that  he  had  been 
himself  a  hearer  of  Aristion  and  (f  John  the  Elder!'  He 
has  been  accused  of  error  and  carelessness  in  thus  under- 
standing the  sentence,  but  I  think  that  I  have  shown  his 
construction  of  it  to  be,  so  far,  perfectly  justifiable. 

(2.)  The  other  argument  is  that  Eusebius,  in  an 
earlier  book,  the  Chronicon,  says  without  any  hesitation, 
that  Papias  was  a  hearer  of  St.  John  the  Ajoostle)  Now, 
that  this  was  the  truer  and  more  unbiassed  conclusion, 
seems  clear  on  other  grounds.  I  shall  show  later  on 
that  "  the  Elder  "  is  quoted  for  statements  which  could 
hardly  have  come  from  any  but  an  Apostle.  And 
besides  the  ancient  and  frequent  testimony  that  Papias 
had  seen  and  conversed  with  St.  John  the  Apo.stle,  it 
would  be  inconceivable  a  jjriori  that  one  who  was 
searching  for  first  hand  and  authentic  testimony  should 
never  have  taken  the  trouble  to  go  from  Hierapolis  to 
Ephesus  to  consult  an  Apostle  of  the  highest  authority, 
who  was  then  living  at  Ephesus  as  the  acknowledged 
head  of  the  Asiatic  Church. 

The  argument,  therefore,  that  Eusebius  was  more 
likely  than  we  are  to  have  known  whether  there  was  or 
was  not  a  "  John  the  Presbj^ter,"  and  whether  Papias 
was  his  hearer  or  the  hearer  of  St.  John  the  Apostle, 
because  Eusebius  possessed  all  the  writings  of  Papias, 
and  we  do  not,  falls  signally  to  the  ground.  Indeed,  it 
tells  the  other  way.  In  his  History  he  reasons  himself 
into  the  belief  that  Papias  was  only  the  pupil  of  "  the 

^  So,  too,  Ireil.  C.  Jlucr.  v.  33.  ^Iwuwov  fiiv  aKOvcrr-t^s,  UoKvKoipTrov  5e  iraipos 
yeyovws.  It  is  monstrous  to  su])i)os('  that  Ironajus  would  use  the  siniplo 
word  "  Johu"  if  lie  ouly  meaut  the  Presbyter. 


JOHN    IN    EPHESUS.  563 

Presbyter ; "  but  he  had  all  the  writings  of  Papias  ia 
his  hand  when  he  wrote  the  Chronicon,  and  there  he 
says,  without  any  hesitation,  that  Papias  was  a  pupil  of 
the  Apostle.  "  John  the  Presbyter  "  is  the  creature  of 
Eusebius's  later  criticism.  If  he  could  have  quoted  from 
Papias  a  single  other  passage  which  in  any  way  coun- 
tenanced his  existence,  there  would  have  been  no  need 
to  base  his  existence  upon  a  mere  conjecture. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  belief  that  Papias  really  had 
seen  and  heard  the  Apostle  St.  John,  rests  not  upon 
conjecture,  but  upon  the  distinct  testimony  of  Irenseus, 
who  sa3^s  that  Papias  was  "  a  hearer  of  John,  and  an 
associate  {kralpo^)  of  Polycarp."  ^  Justin  Martyr  lays 
the  scene  of  his  dialogue  with  Trypho  in  Ephesus ;  and 
he  quotes  the  Apocalypse  as  the  work  of  the  Apostle." 
That  the  John  intended  is  the  Apostle — the  only  John 
of  whom  Irenseus  knew  anything — is  sufficiently  clear, 
because  Irenseus,  in  his  letters  to  Victor  and  to  Florinus, 
distinctly  says  so.^  Apollonius,  Bishop  of  Ephesus, 
says  that  the  Apostle  lived  at  Ephesus,  and  wrote  the 
Apocalypse/  Melito,  Bishop  of  Sardis,  must  have  held 
the  same  opinion,  as  is  clear  from  the  silence  of  Eusebius.^ 
ApoUinarius,  who  succeeded  Papias  as  Bishop  of  Hiera- 
polis,  A.D.  170,  and  was  therefore  specially  likely  to  be 
well  informed,  must  have  known  that  both  Polycarp  and 
Papias  were  hearers  of  the  Apostle.^     Jerome,  in  his 

^  Iren.  c.  Haer.  v.  33.  So  too  (Ecuineuius,  ou  Acts  ii. ;  Nicepliorus, 
H.  E.  iii.  20;  and  Anastasius  Sinaita  {Hexaem.  vii.),  who  calls  liim  a 
pupil  of  the  "  bosom- disciple  "  (o  iiriffri^eios).     See  Routli,  Bel.  Sacr.  i.  15. 

2  Just.  M.  Dial.  81. 

3  Ircu.  c.  Ilaer.  iii.  1,  §  1,  and  ap.  Euseb.  II.  E.  v.  20 — 24. 
«  Ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  18. 

°  See  Jer.  De  Virr.  Illustr.  24. 

"  Ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  27 ;  v.  19.     Jer.  De  Virr.  Illustr.  26. 

h   k  2 


564  APPENDIX. 

Be  Viris  lUustribus,  says  the  same.^  Till  very  recent 
times  no  one  ever  breathed  a  doubt  that  Polycarp  had 
been  a  hearer  of  the  Apostle,  and  had  by  him  been 
appointed  Bishop  of  Smyrna.^  If,  then,  Polycarp  was  a 
hearer  of  the  Apostle,  there  can  be  no  difficulty  in 
accepting  the  testimony  that  Papias,  who  was  a  friend 
and  contemporary  of  Polycarp,  had  enjoyed  the  same 
peculiar  privilege. 

II.  But  now  let  us  examine  more  closely  the  criti- 
cism of  Eusebius^  upon  the  passage  of  Papias.  He 
says  "  that  Papias  mentions  the  name  of  John  twice, 
and  in  the  first  clause  places  him  with  Peter  and  the  rest 
of  the  Apostles,  clearly  indicating  the  Evangelist ;  but 
that  in  the  second  clause  he  ranks  him  with  others  who 
were  not  Apostles,  placing  Aristion  before  him,  and  he 
distinctly  calls  him  '  an  Elder;'  so  that  even  in  this  way 
he  indicates  the  truth  of  the  statements  of  those  who 
have  said  that  there  were  two  who  had  the  same  name 
in  Asia,  and  that  there  were  two  tombs  in  Ephesus,  and 
that  each  is  still  called  '  a  tomb  of  John.'  We  ought 
to  attend  to  these  facts,  for  it  is  probable  that  it  was  the 
second  John  who  saw  the  Apocalypse  which  passes  under 
the  name  of  John,  unless  any  one  wishes  to  believe  that  it 
was  the  firsts 

It  should  be  most  carefully  observed  that  Eusebius 
does  not  here  profess  to  know  anything  whatever  about 
this  "  John  the  Elder,"  and  that  he  is  not  quite  fair  in 
saying  that  Papias  calls  him  "r/w  Elder."  Papias  did 
not  call  him  "  a7i  Elder,"  but  "  the  Elder,"  which  may 
be  a  very  different  thing.  Eusebius  also  fails  to  notice 
that  the  "  John  "  of  the  second  clause  is  described  by 

'  Jer.  I.  c.  c.  xviii. 

2  Tort.  De  Praescr.  Uaer.  v.  30.  ^  H.  E.  iii.  39. 


EUSEBIUS.  565 

exactly  the  same  two  designations  as  the  John  of  the 
first  clause,  namely,  as  one  of  the  "  Elders,"  and  as  a 
"  disciple  of  the  Lord."     Eusebius  is  only  led  to  infer 
that  there  was  a  John  who  was  not  the  Apostle,  (1) 
by  his    criticisms  of   this  single   passage  ;    (2)   by  the 
fact  that  "  some  "  had  said  so ;  and  (3)  because  these 
persons    stated    that   there    were    still  two    tombs    at 
Ephesus    which   were   known    by  the   name  of  John. 
And  yet,  after  all,  Eusebius  is  so  little   convinced  by 
his  own  reasoning — he  is  so  anxious  "  to  steer  between 
the  Scylla  and  Chary bdis  of  yes  and  no  " — he  sees  that 
the  evidence  for  the  Apostolic  authorship  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse is  so  strong — that  he  is  still  obliged  to  leave  the 
authorship  of  the  book  a  matter  of  individual  opinion. 
Whatever    may   be  thought    as    to    the    ingenuity    of 
his  reasoning,   Eusebius  furnishes  the   most   complete 
refutation  of  his  own  theory  by  the  inability  to  produce 
a   single    grain    of   testimony  or  even   of  tradition  in 
favour  of  the  view  that  this  separate  "  Presbyter  "  had 
ever  existed. 

Two  questions  then  arise  : — 

a-  Why  was  Eusebius  so  anxious  to  believe  in  the 
existence  of  this  "  John  the  Presbyter"? 

^.  Who  were  the  "  some  "  on  whose  testimony  he 
relies  ? 

a.  The  answers  to  both  questions  are  very  easy. 
Eusebius  disliked  the  Apocalypse.  He  seldom  quotes 
it.  In  one  passage  he  refers  to  it  as  possibly  (ei  ye  (fjaveCrj) 
spurious,  and  in  another  as  possibly  (et  ye  ^avelri) 
genuine,  leaving  the  decision  very  much  to  the  reader 
himself.  He  was  extremely  opposed  to  the  fanatical 
and  sensuous  Chiliasm,  which  derived  its  sole  support 
from    this   book ;    and    on   this    very   ground   he    was 


566  APPENDIX. 

inclined  to  look  down  upon  the  old  Bishop  of  Hiera- 
polis,  with  his  credulous  stories  and  Judaic  sympathies. 
If  the  millennial  traditions  which  Papias  had  collected 
in  his  Expositions  could  be  dissociated  from  the 
authority  of  the  Apostle,  and  made  to  rest  on  that  of 
an  unknown  and  sub-apostolic  personage,  it  would  be 
more  easy  to  set  them  aside. 

^.  As  to  the  "  some  "  to  whom  Eusebius  alludes, 
they  probably  reduce  themselves  to  Dionysius  of  Alex- 
andria, just  as  the  "  some  "  to  whom  Dionysius  himself 
alludes  as  disjoaraging  the  Apocalypse  probably  reduce 
themselves  to  the  Alogi.  At  any  rate,  the  only  trace 
of  any  conjecture  as  to  the  existence  of  "  John  the 
Presbyter  "j  previous  to  Eusebius,  is  in  the  famous 
criticism  on  the  Apocalypse  by  Dion^^sius.  In  that 
criticism,  preserved  for  us  only  by  Eusebius,^  the 
learned  Patriarch  of  Alexandria  says  that  it  is  clear 
from  the  testimony  of  the  book  itself  that  a  "  John  " 
wrote  the  Apocalypse,  but  that  instead  of  calling 
himself  "  the  disciple  beloved  by  the  Lord "  (as  in 
the  Gospel),  or,  "the  brother  of  James,"  or  "one 
who  has  actually  seen  and  heard  the  Lord,"  which 
would  have  clearly  indicated  his  individuality,  he  only 
calls  himself  "your  brother  and  fellow  in  affliction," 
and  "  a  witness  of  Jesus,"  and  "  blessed  because  he  saw 
and  heard  these  revelations."  "  Now  I  think,"  continues 
Dionysius,  "  that  there  have  been  many  who  bore  the 
same  name  as  John  the  Apostle,  who  loved  that  desig- 
nation out  of  their  love  and  admiration  and  emulation 
for  him,  and  because  they  wished  to  be  loved  of  the 
Lord  as  he  was ;  just  as  many  children  are  named 
after   Paul   and    Peter.     Nay,   there   is   even   another 

1  H.  E.  vii.  25. 


DIONYSIUS    OF   ALEXANDRIA.  567 

John  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  who  bore  the  sur- 
name of  Mart.  I  cannot  say  whether  this  be  the 
John  who  wrote  the  Apocalypse,  for  it  is  not  recorded 
that  he  went  with  them  (Barnabas  and  Paul)  into  Asia ; 
but  I  think  that  it  was  some  other  John  of  those  who  were 
in  Asia,  since  some  even  say  that  there  are  two  tombs  in 
Ephesus,  each  of  which  is  called  '  the  tomb  of  John.'  " 

If  the  "  some  "  to  whom  Eusebius  ajDpeals,  include 
any  one  except  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  and  those  who 
had  given  him  his  information,  we  have  at  any  rate  no 
clue  as  to  who  they  were.  Had  they  been  persons  of 
special  authority,  or  with  special  opportunities  of  know- 
ing the  facts,  Eusebius  would  have  told  us  something 
about  them.  And  what  does  the  evidence  furnished 
by  Dionysius  amount  to  ?  Not  (be  it  observed)  to  the 
statement  that  there  were  two  Johns,  but  only  that  John 
was  a  common  name,  and  that  there  were  two  tombs  in 
Ephesus,  each  of  which  was  pointed  out  by  the  local 
ciceroni  as  a  tomb  of  John  !  He  does  not  even  pretend 
to  imply  that  they  were  the  tombs  of  two  Johns.  On 
the  contrary,  each  was  asserted  to  be  the  tomb  of  the 
Apostle. 

III.  Could  any  reader  of  modern  Grerman  criticisms 
believe  that  beyond  this  we  know  absolutely  nothing 
about  John  the  Presbyter,  as  distinct  from  John  the 
Apostle  ?  ^  And  how  utterly  baseless  a  foundation  is 
this  for  such  a  superstructure  !  Dionysius  wrote  about 
the  middle  of  the  third  century,^  when  John  had  been 
laid  in  his   grave    for  at   least   a  century  and  a  half. 

^  No  importance  can  be  attached  by  any  one  to  the  guess  or  invention 
of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  (vii.  46),  tliat  the  Px'esbyter  succeeded  the 
Apostle  as  Bishop  of  Ephesus. 

2  He  succeeded  to  the  Presidency  of  the  Catechetical  School  at  Alex- 
andria in  A.D.  231. 


568  APPENDIX. 

There  is  no  tradition  worth  the  name  as  to  the  place 
and  manner  of  the  Apostle's  death,  and  in  the  absence 
of  authentic  information,  it  was  believed  or  assumed  that 
he  died  at  Ephesus.  Since  this  was  the  common  belief, 
it  was  quite  natural  that  the  Christians  who  visited 
Ephesus  should  ask  to  be  shown  the  grave  of  John.^ 
Now  the  duplicate  sites  of  many  other  "  holy  places  " 
in  Palestine  and  elsewhere  show  that  if,  in  a  case  where 
there  was  no  certainty,  07ie  supposed  grave  was  pointed 
out,  it  was  a  very  likely  result  that  there  would  be  two. 
The  two  graves  were  merely  rival  sites  for  a  spot 
which,  if  either  of  them  were  genuine,  would  be  full 
of  interest.  Yet,  on  grounds  so  slight  as  these,  Diony- 
sius — who,  though  he  speaks  reverently  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse, could  not  persuade  himself  that  it  was  the  work 
of  the  Apostle — first  infers  that  there  were  two  Johns  ; 
and,  secondly,  that  one  of  them  may  have  been  suf- 
ficiently famous  to  be  the  author  of  the  Eevelation. 

That  Dionysius  is  merely  clutching  at  a  theory  is 
proved  by  his  half  suggestion  that  the  author  may  have 
been  John  Mark  the  Evangelist ;  a  suggestion  in  which, 
so  far  as  I  am  aware,  he  has  had  scarcely  a  single  fol- 
lower for  1,500  years. ^ 

But,  further  than  this,  his  suggestion  proves  a  great 
deal  more  than  he  intended  by  it.  This  second  John, 
if  he  existed  at  all,  must  have  been  an  exile  in  Patmos, 
and  a  person  of  such  immense  and  acknowledged  in- 

•  Similarly  the  "tropliios"  of  Peter  and  Paul  were  pointed  out  at 
Rome  as  early  as  tlie  days  of  the  Presbyter  Gains  (a.d.  213). 

^  The  only  exceptions  are  Beza  and  Hitzig.  Beza.  Prolegom.  in 
Apoc.  p.  744.  "  Quod  si  quid  aliud  lieeret  ex  stylo  conjicore,  neraiui 
certe  potius  quam  Marco  tribuerim,  qui  et  ipse  Joannes  dictus  est " 
(Liicke,  Einleit.  in  d.  Olhnbar.  p.  780).  Hitzig,  Ueber  Joh.  MarJcui^, 
1843. 


ST.    JOHN    IN    EPHESUS.  5G9 

fluence  as  to  be  able  to  address  the  Seven  Churcbes  of 
Asia  with  almost  more  than  Apostolic  authority.  But, 
as  we  can  now  prove,  the  Apocalypse  was  written  about 
A.D.  68  ;  and  if  John  the  Presbyter  at  that  time  exer- 
cised so  powerful  a  sway  over  Asia,  then  there  is  little 
or  no  room  left  for  the  work  of  John  the  Apostle. 
Polycrates,  Bishop  of  Ephesus  (a.d.  19G),  spoke  of 
John  the  Apostle  and  Philip  ^  as  the  two  great  lights 
of  Asia;-  but  if  John  the  Presbyter  is  the  exile  of 
Patmos  and  the  author  of  the  Second  and  Third 
Epistles,  he  must  have  been,  on  the  evidence  of  these 
writings,  a  "  light  of  Asia  "  whose  splendour  was  much 
more  powerful  than  that  of  Philip,  and  so  bright  as  to 
make  the  name  even  of  the  Apostle  grow  somewhat  pale. 
If  the  Presbyter  wrote  the  Apocalypse,  a  large  part 
of  the  evidence  for  the  Asiatic  residence  of  St.  John 
falls  to  the  ground.  This  is  the  actual  result  arrived 
at  by  Scholten,  Lipsius,  Keim,  and  other  Dutch  and 
Grerman  theologians,  who  fall  back  on  an  unauthorized 
and  dubious  quotation  from  Papias  bj^  Georgius 
Hamartolos,  to  the  effect  that  John  the  Apostle  was 
martyred  by  the  Jews.  Dionysius  shows  no  trace  of  sufh 
wild  conclusions,  though  they  would  naturally  spring 
from  his  own  conjecture;  and,  as  for  Georgius  Hamartolos, 
we  have  the  less  scruple  in  setting  aside  his  supposed 
quotation,  because  none  of  his  predecessors  for  eight 
centuries  know  anything  about  it,  and  because  in  the 
very  same  sentence  he  has  flagrantly  mis-stated  the 
known  opinion  of  Origen.^ 

'  The  Apostle,  not  the  Deacon  (Euseb.  II.  E.  iii.  39). 
■  Polycr.  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.    31 ;    v.  24.     See   Routh,  Bd.  Sacr. 
p.  369. 

■*  Georgius  Hamartolos  not  only  quotes  Papias  for  the  assertion  that 


570  APPENDIX. 

IV.  Keim  dwells  much  on  the  fact  that  little  or  no 
mention  is  made  of  the  Asiatic  work  of  St.  John  till 
the  close  of  the  second  century.  It  is  not  mentioned, 
he  says,  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  nor  in  the  Ignatian 
Epistles,  nor  in  Polycarp's  letter  to  the  Philippians, 
nor  in  the  letter  of  the  Churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne. 
The  answer  to  this  difficulty,  if  it  be  one,  is  twofold. 
It  is  that,  in  the  first  place,  there  was  no  special  reason 
why  it  should  have  been  mentioned  in  any  one  of  these 
documents  ;  and  that,  in  the  second  place,  the  "  argu- 
ment from  silence "  is  always  a  most  untrustworthy 
way  of  attempting  to  throw  doubts  on  facts  for  which 
there  is  positive  evidence.  Are  we  to  doubt  the  exis- 
tence of  Milton  or  of  Jeremy  Taylor — of  Bacon  or  of 
Shakspeare — because  these  contemporaries  make  no 
allusion  to  each  other  in  their  voluminous  writings  ? 
Humboldt  points  out  that  in  the  archives  of  Barcelona 
there  is  no  trace  of  an  event  so  important  as  the  tri- 
umphal entry  of  Columbus  ;  in  Marco  Polo's  travels  no 
mention  of  the  wall  of  China ;  in  the  archives  of 
Portugal  no  allusion  to  the  travels  of  Amerigo  Vespucci.^ 
Michelet,  in  his  History  of  France,  states  that  the 
two  chief  historians  of  the  Sicilian  Vespers  make  no 
mention  whatever  of  Procida,  though  he  was  un- 
doubtedly the  chief  mover  in  that  terrible  event." 
The  argumenium.  ex  silent io  may  be  set  aside  as 
wholly  unimportant.  Moreover,  in  this  instance  it  is 
singularly  inappropriate,  since  it  tells  with  redoubled 
force  against  the  very  existence  of  any  separate  "  John 

St.  John  had  been  martyred  by  tho  Jews,  but  says  that  Origen  thought 
so  too,  \vl\ich  is  tho  reverse  of  the  fact  (Orig.  in  Matt.). 

^  Gesch.  d.  Geogr.,  vol.  iv.  p.  160. 

2  Varnhagen  vou  Euse,  Tagebucher,  vol.  i.  p.  123.  These  two  instances 
are  quoted  by  Krenkel,  Der  Ap.  Johan.  p.  139. 


ST.    JOHN    IN    EPHESUS.  571 

the  Presbyter,"  who  is  passed  over  in  still  profounder 
silence  by  all  sources  of  information  alike. 

It  is  quite  certain  that  such  an  hypothesis  as  the 
denial  of  John's  work  in  Asia  would  have  appeared 
absurd  to  Dionysius.  He  was  probably  in  possession 
of  a  stronger  and  more  detailed  tradition  on  the  subject 
than  we  are.  At  any  rate,  he  would  not  have  listened 
for  a  moment  to  the  supposition  on  which  this  recent 
theory  depends.  It  requires  us  to  believe  that  Irenseus 
(a.d.  ISO)  actually  confounded  John  the  Apostle  loith  John 
the  Presbi/ter !  Such  a  supposition  is — I  fear  it  must 
be  said — utterly  absurd.  Irenseus  repeatedly  refers  to 
"  John,"  and  "  John  the  Lord's  disciple,"  and  for- 
tunately it  cannot  be  asserted  that  he  is  referring  to 
this  second  John,  because  in  one  passage  he  expressly 
calls  him  "  John  the  disciple  of  the  Lord  who  leaned 
upon  his  breast,  and  himself  published  the  Gospel 
while  living  in  Ephesus  of  Asia."  ^  There  is  in  Irenseus 
no  trace  of  any  other  John  ;  nor  was  there  any  such 
trace  in  the  writings  of  Poh^crates,  Bishop  of  Ephesus, 
or  Apollinarius,  Bishop  of  Hierapolis  —  two  persons 
who  were  eminently  likely  to  be  well  informed  about 
the  history  of  the  Christian  Church  in  those  two  cities. 
Irenseus  tells  us  that  Polycarp  had  been  the  disciple 
of  St.  John,  and  had  always  referred  to  him  about 
disputed  questions,  and  had  felt  for  him  an  unbounded 
reverence.  Now  Irenseus  too  was  of  Asiatic  origin,  and 
knew  the  traditions  of  Ephesus.  He  had  himself  been 
a  hearer  of  Polycarp,  and  has  left  a  most  graphic  de- 
scription of  the  manner  in  which  the  old  man  used  to 
demean  himself.     And  yet  we  are  asked  to  believe  that 

1  See  Iren.  c.  Haer.  ii.  22,  §  5 ;  iii.  1,  §  1 ;  iii.  3,  §  4 ;  v.  30,  §  1 ;  33, 
§§  3,  4 ;  and  op.  Eusob.  H.  E.  v.  24. 


572  APPENDIX.  • 

when  be  calls  Polycarp  "a  hearer  of  John"  he  mistook 
John  the  Apostle  for  John  the  Presbyter,  though  of 
this  John  the  Presbyter  there  is  not  so  much  as  a 
tradition,  however  faint,  until  we  come  to  the  middle 
of  the  third  century  ;  and  no  trace  even  then  except  a 
vague  report  that  there  were  at  Ephesus  two  graves 
known  as  "■raves  of  John  !  But  St.  Jerome  furnishes 
us  with  conclusive  evidence  of  the  extremely  valueless 
character  of  this  grain  of  supposed  fact  in  the  ever- 
widening  ocean  of  theory.  He  says  {Be  Viris  Illiistr.) 
that  "  another  tomb  is  shown  at  Ephesus  as  the  tomb 
of  John  the  Presbyter,  although  some  think  that  they 
ARE  both  tombs  OF  JoHN  THE  Evangelist"!  Had  it 
not  been  for  dogmatic  reasons,  it  is  probable  that  no 
one  would  have  thought  anything  else. 

There  is  overwhelming  evidence  that  John  the 
Apostle  spent  many  of  his  last  years  in  Asia.  It  is 
one  of  the  most  unanimous  and  best  supported  of 
Church  traditions,  and  it  can  be  traced  in  a  continuous 
sequence  of  evidence  from  the  days  of  those  who  were 
his  contemporaries,  and  had  enjoyed  his  personal  inter- 
course. That  there  was  any  John  the  Presbyter  distinct 
from  the  Apostle,  there  is  no  evidence  whatever.  For 
to  say  that  a  second-hand  report  about  two  graves  in 
Ephesus  is  anj^  evidence,  is  idle.  We  should  never 
have  heard  a  word  about  these  two  graves,  or  at  any 
rate,  tJiis  is  not  the  inference  which  would  have  been 
drawn  from  them,  if  Dionysius  had  not  disliked  to 
attribute  the  Apocalypse  to  St.  John,  and  if  Eusebius, 
in  common  with  many  others,  had  not  felt  a  scarcely 
concealed  desire  to  get  rid  of  the  book  altogether.  But 
if  this  imaginary  "  Presbyter "  wrote  the  Apocalypse 
he  must,  on  the  showing  of  the  book  itself,  have  been 


JOHN    THE    ELDER.  573 

a  very  great  man  indeed,  and  one  whose  position  en- 
abled him  to  adopt  a  tone  more  authoritative  than  was 
adopted  even  by  St.  Paul.  Is  it  conceivable  that  of 
such  a  man  there  would  not  be  so  much  as  a  single 
other  trace  except  the  report  of  a  dubious  grave  con- 
jecturally  assigned  to  him  a  century  and  a  half  after 
he  was  dead  ? 

The  ancient  Fathers,  both  Greek  and  Latin,  were 
not  to  be  misled  either  by  the  specious  suggestion  of 
Dionysius,  or  by  the  bold  assertion  of  Eusebius  more 
than  seventy  years  afterwards.  Neither  of  these  great 
writers  found  any  one  to  follow  them  in  their  theoretic 
inferences  from  the  loose  clause  of  Papias.  The  Fathers 
had  the  works  of  Papias  in  their  hands,  and  knew  that 
he  had  nowhere  disintegrated  the  individuality  of  the 
one  and  only  "  John,"  whom  the  Church  would  under- 
stand to  be  referred  to  when  that  name  was  mentioned. 
They  also  had  in  their  hands  the  Acts  of  Leucius, 
which  are  probably  the  chief  source  of  Johannine  tra- 
ditions ;  and  it  is  clear  from  the  silence  of  Eusebius 
and  Dionysius  that  there  the  Presbyter  had  no  exis- 
tence. Accordingly,  Apollinarius,  Anastasius  Sinaita, 
Maximus,  and  many  others,  go  on  repeating  that 
Papias  was  a  hearer  of  Jo/m  the  Apostle,  without  so 
much  as  noticing  that  there  was  anything  doubtful  in 
the  passage  out  of  which  Eusebius  has  conjured  his 
shadowy  Presbyter. 

V.  But  some  will  say,  have  we  not  two  Epistles 
which  profess  to  emanate  from  "  John  the  Presbyter  "  ? 
Undoubtedly  we  have,  and  this  is  one  of  the  strongest 
evidences  that  "John  the  Presbyter"  was  no  other 
than  "John  the  Apostle,"  for  as  St.  John  nowhere 
claims  his  Apostolic  authority,  he  would  least  of  all  be 


574  APPENDIX. 

likely  to  do  so  in  two  private  notes  to  otherwise  un- 
known individuals ;  notes  which  do  not  contain  a  single 
item  of  importance  except  where  the}^  exactly  coincide 
with  the  thoughts,  and  indeed  the  actual  words,  of  the 
First  Epistle ;  notes  which  no  separate  "  John  the 
Preshyter "  could  possibly  have  written  unless  his 
mind  were  an  echo  of  the  Apostle's  as  well  as  his 
name.  The  Apostle  calls  himself  "  the  Presbyter " 
in  these  little  private  letters,  because  the  title  suf- 
ficiently indicated  his  personality  as  the  aged  Head 
of  the  Asiatic  Churches,  and  as  one  who  belonged  to 
a  past  epoch. -^  No  other  designation  would  have  been 
so  simple,  so  dignified,  and  so  suitable.  And  most 
certainly  Papias  was  not  infiuenced  by  this  circum- 
stance ;  for  while  he  was  acquainted  with  the  First 
Epistle  of  St.  John,  he  does  not  seem  to  have  known 
of  the  existence  of  the  Second  or  Third. 

VI.  But  the  use  of  this  designation,  "the  Elder," 
is  further  illustrated  by  Papias  himself.  He  prefaces 
one  of  his  oral  traditions  with  the  words,  "  These 
things  the  Elder  used  to  say."  We  have  seen  that  he 
used  the  word  "Elders"  in  its  narrower  sense  as 
synonymous  with  "  Apostles."  He  meant  by  the 
term  those  who  were  the  oldest  and  most  venerated 
sources  of  tradition.  He  certainly  would  not  have 
given  this  specific  title  to  any  one  who  belonged  only 
to  the  second  generation,  and  who  would  therefore  have 
been  a  contemporary  of  his  own.  By  "  the  Elder " 
he  has  been  always  and  rightly  understood  to  mean 
John,  who,  as  the  last  survivor  of  the  Apostolic  band, 

1  I  do  not  rofor  to  tlio  parallel  case  of  St.  Paul  calling'  himself  "  the 
aged  "  in  Philemon  9,  because  the  word  ■npeff^in)]s  may  there  mean  '"  an 
ambassador." 


"THE    ELDER."  575 

was  "  the  Elder  "  Kar  i^oxnv.  He  does  not  give  this 
title  even  to  Aristion,  though  he  too  was  a  living  witness 
of  facts  connected  with  the  life  and  ministry  of  Christ. 

Again,  the  remarks  ascribed  to  this  intensel}^  vene- 
rated "  Elder  "  are  such  as  we  can  hardly  imagine  that 
any  one  short  of  an  Apostle,  and  such  an  Apostle  as 
St.  John,  would  have  had  authority  to  make.  For 
instance,  the  Gospel  of  St.  Mark  is  universally  be- 
lieved to  have  been  written  under  the  guidance  of  St. 
Peter.  The  numerous  graphic  and  vivid  touches  in 
which  it  abounds,  as  well  as  many  other  circumstances, 
lend  probability  to  this  tradition.  Now  who  is  the 
original  authority  for  this  belief  ?  None  other  than 
"  the  Elder"  himself.  He  informs  Paj)ias  that  "  Mark 
having  become  the  interpreter  of  Peter,  wrote  accurately 
all  that  he  (Peter)  related."^  But,  such  being  the  case, 
what  ordinary  disciple,  even  of  the  first  generation, 
would  have  ventured  to  criticise  ex  cathedra — to  criticise 
as  though  from  the  standpoint  of  wider  and  more  in- 
timate knowledge  —  a  Gospel  which  rested  on  the 
authority  of  the  Chief  of  the  Apostles  ?  Surely  there 
was  no  living  man  who  would  have  ventured  to  do  this, 
unless  he  were  one  whose  opportunities  of  information 
were  greater  even  than  those  of  St.  Peter?  Yet  "the 
Elder  "  does  so.  He  informed  Papias  that  though  St. 
Mark  wrote  truthfully,  to  the  best  of  his  remembrance, 
he  did  not  write  the  events  of  Christ's  life  and  teaching 
in  "chronological  order"  {ov  /xevrot  rd^ec).  Now  this  we 
should  have  thought,  apart  from  the    Fourth   Gospel, 

Euseb.  H.  E.  iil.  39.  MdpKOs  fiev  kp^'i]Vivr^s  Xlirpov  yevS/.iei'Os  offa 
ilxi'7]fj.6vev(Tev  aKpt^ws  eypa^ey.  The  wortls  may  meau,  "  Wrote  accui'ately 
all  that  he  (Mai'k)  remembered;"  or,  "all  that  he  (Peter)  related" 
(Westcott,  On  the  Canon,  p.  74).  Here,  again,  wo  notice  the  ambiguity  of 
the  style  of  Papias. 


576  APPENDIX. 

is  exactly  what  St.  Mark  does.  But  yet  "the  Elder" 
is  right,  because  the  Elder  is  none  other  than  the 
Apostle  and  the  Evangelist.  He  can  speak  even  of 
St.  Mark  in  a  tone  of  superiority,  as  of  one  who 
"  neither  heard  the  Lord  nor  followed  Him."  He 
knew,  as  perhaps  no  other  man  knew,  that  the  Synoptic 
Evangelists  were  but  imperfectly  informed  as  to  the 
events  and  discourses  of  that  ministry  in  Jndcea,  as 
apart  from  Galilee,  which  it  was  his  own  special 
privilege  to  make  known  to  the  world.  Hence  he  can 
£ven  venture  to  say  of  St.  Peter  himself,  that  "  he  used 
to  frame  his  teachings  with  reference  to  the  present 
needs  of  his  hearers,  and  not  as  making  a  connected 
narrative  of  the  Lord's  discourses."  What  mere 
secondary  Presbyter  would  have  spoken  in  terms  of 
such  familiarity  and  even  equality  of  "  the  Pilot  of  the 
Gralilean  Lake  "  ?  In  such  criticisms  do  we  not  hear 
unmistakably  the  accents  of  an  Apostle  ? 

VII.  There  is,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  but  one  slight 
objection  to  the  arguments  which  I  have  here  stated. 
It  is  that,  if  our  conclusion  be  correct,  Papias  mentions 
Aristion  in  the  same  breath  with  St.  John  the  Apostle, 
and  even  puts  Aristion's  name  first. 

I  fully  admit  that  this  mention  of  Aristion  is  per- 
plexing. Of  this  Aristion  we  know  absolutely  nothing.^ 
It  is  startling,  and  it  is  a  little  painful,  to  find  Papias 
referring  to  him  as  an  eminent  contemporary  witness 
to  the  truth  of  the  Gospel  narrative,  when  we  can  give 
no  information  whatever  respecting  him.  He  is  a 
Tioviinis  umbra,  and  nothing  more. 

'  There  is  no  autliority  for  the  assertion  of  the  Apostolical  Consti- 
tutions (vii.  46),  which  speaks  of  his  martyrdom,  and  connects  him  with 
the  Church  of  SmjTna. 


ARISTIOK  577 

So  strongly  has  this  been  felt  that  some — and  among 
them  Eenan — suppose  that,  instead  of  "  the  disciples 
of  the  Lord  "  in  the  second  clause  of  the  passage  of 
Papias,  we  ought  to  read  "  the  disciples  of  disciples 
{ixadrjToX  fjiadi^rwv)  of  the  Lord,"  and  that  the  word 
fxadrjTwv — which  would  relegate  Aristion  and  "  John  the 
Presbyter  "  to  the  second  generation  of  disciples — has 
dropped  out  by  the  clerical  error  known  as  horn  mot  cleuton. 
Another  suggestion  is,  that  the  name  of  John  in  the 
tirst  clause  is  simply  interpolated.  But  since  neither 
Eusebius  nor  any  one  else  knew  or  dreamt  of  such  read- 
ings, the  conjectures  merely  rest  on  foregone  conclusions. 
If  we  may  thus  tamper  with  ancient  authors,  we  may 
make  them  say  anything  that  we  please.  Moreover,  a 
person  who  belonged  to  the  second  generation  of  dis- 
ciples would  not  have  furnished  the  sort  of  authority 
which  Papias  required.  To  that  second  generation  he 
liiraseK  may  be  said  to  have  belonged,  for  he  was  a  con- 
temporary of  the  daughters  of  Philip,  and  (as  we  have 
seen  reason  to  believe)  had  talked  in  his  youth  with 
John  the  Apostle.  What  he  wanted  for  the  purposes 
of  his  Ecvpositions,  was  oral  testimony  derived  at  first 
hand  from  the  original  sources. 

I  have  sometimes  thought,  and  still  think,  that 
Aristion  is  a  name  which  conceals  some  well-known 
person.^  The  Jewish  Apostles  commonly  bore  two 
names  :  one  among  their  own  countrymen,  and  one  for 
use  among  the   Gentiles.     There  is  nothing  to  forbid 

*  Wlien  I  wrote  tliis  I  was  entirely  unaware  tliat  Kreukcl,  in  liis  Der 
Apostel  Johannes,  p.  117,  had  been  led  to  make  exactly  the  same  con- 
jecture. Pereant  qui  ante  nos  nostra  dixenmt !  Polycrates  tells  ns  that 
John  and  Philip  were  at  this  time  the  "  two  great  lights  of  Asia."  If 
"  Philip  "  were  not  a  Greek  name,  one  might  have  suspected  that  Aristion 
was  a  local  name  borne  by  Philij). 

/  / 


578  APPENDIX. 

the  supposition  that  the  otherwise  unknown  designation 
may  in  roalit}^  refer  to  some  Apostle  or  Apostolic 
man  who,  like  St.  John  and  St.  Philip,  had  taken 
refuge  in  Asia  from  the  storm  of  persecution  and 
calamity  which  had  burst  over  Judaea,  and  who  was 
known  at  liierapolis  by  the  Greek  name  Aristion.  If 
this  very  reasonable  and  moderate  supposition  be 
allowed,  all  difficulty  vanishes.  What  Papias  then 
means  to  say  is,  that  long  before  he  wrote  his  book 
it  had  been  his  habit  to  gather  all  he  could  about  the 
statements  of  the  Apostles,  whom  he  calls  "  Elders  " — 
and  among  them  about  the  statements  of  John — from 
those  who  had  seen  them  ;  and  that  he  also  took  notes 
of  the  living  "  oracles  "  furnished  to  him  directly  by 
Aristion  (who  was  evidently  well  known  to  Papias's 
readers)  and  even — which  is  the  reason  why  he  keeps 
the  name  to  the  last  as  being  the  fact  which  he  most 
wished  to  emphasize — by  "John  the  Elder;" — the  same 
John — 6  TTuvv — the  only  John  of  whom  any  one  knew 
anything — who  so  long  survived  his  brother  Apostles, 
and  to  whose  indirect  testimony  Papias  has  just  referred. 

VIII.  We  have  then  sifted  to  the  bottom  the  whole 
of  the  so-called  evidence  for  the  existence  of  a  "  John 
the  Presbyter  "  who  was  not  John  the  Apostle. 

It  is— 

1.  A  passage  of  Papias,  capable  of  quite  a  different 
interpretation,  and  wliich  seems  to  have  received  a 
quite  different  interpretation,  not  only  for  a  full  century 
after  he  was  dead,  but  also  (in  spite  of  Eusebius)  in 
subsequent  times. 

2.  A  hesitating  and  tentative  guess  of  Dionysius, 
rising  solely  from  his  avowed  inability  to  regard  the 
Apostle  as  the  autlior  of  tlie  Apocalypse. 


THE    EVIDENCE.  579 

3.  Some  dubious  gossip  {j>aalv)  about  two  tombs  at 
Ephesus,  which,  if  trustworthy  at  all,  was  believed  by 
some  to  be  due  to  an  attempt  to  reconcile  the  inventions 
of  rival  guides. 

4.  Eagerness  on  the  part  of  Eusebius  to  support 
this  inverted  pyramid  of  conjectures,  out  of  positive 
dislike  to  the  Apocalypse  caused  by  the  abuses  of 
Millenarians.^ 

"  Only  this,  and  nothing  more  "  !  And  these  are 
the  grounds  on  which  we  are  now  asked  to  set  aside 
the  direct  or  indirect  testimony  of  Papias,^  of  Justin 
Martyr,^  of  Polycarp,*  of  Polycrates,^  of  Irenseus,^  of 
Apollonius,''  of  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  of  Origen,  of 
Melito,^  of  Andreas,  of  Arethas,  and,  in  fact,  of  unbroken 
Church  tradition,  and  to  assign  the  works  of  the  last 
and  one  of  the  greatest  Apostles  to  an  obscure  and 
dubious  Presbyter  !  It  is  on  this  evidence — so  late  and 
so  tottering — evidence  based  on  an  awkwardly  expressed 
but  perfectly  explicable  passage  of  Papias,  a  simple 
writer  who  had  no  pretence  to  subtlety  of  intellect  or 
grace  of  style  —  and  on  a  professed  quotation  from 
Papias  in  the  ninth  century  by  Georgius  Hamartolos, 
who,  in  the  very  same  sentence,  attributes  to  Origen 
an  opinion  which  his  own  writings  show  to  be  false — 

^  Speaking  of  tlie  "  certain  strange  parables  and  teacliings  of  the 
Saviour,  and  certain  other  somewhat  mystical  things,"  which  Papias 
recorded,  "  from  unwritten  tradition,"  Eusebius  specially  mentions  "  some 
millennium  of  years  after  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  during  which  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  shall  be  established  bodily  upon  this  earth." 

-  Ap.  Anastas.  Sinaita,  Hexaem.  i.  (Routh,  i.  15). 

»  Dial.  c.  Tryph.  81. 

*  Ap.  Iren.,  &e.,  and  Euseb.  Chron.  ad  Olymp.  220. 

^  See  Jer.  de  Virr.  Illustr.  xlv. ;  Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  26  (Routh,  i.  372j. 

8  Ap.  Euseb.  V.  20,  &c. 

^  Euseb.  If.  E.  V.  18. 

8  Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  26. 

/  /   2 


580  APPENDIX. 

that  some  critics  have  ventured  to  rewrite  the  history 
of  the  first  century  ;  to  assert,  in  spite  of  overvvhehniiii^ 
evidence,  that  the  Apostle  St.  John  never  was  in  Asia 
at  all ;  that  Polycarp  never  saw  him ;  that  the  John 
for  whom  Pol3^carp  expressed  so  profound  a  reverence 
was  only  a  "  Presbyter  "  who,  like  himself,  belonged  to 
the  second  generation  of  Christians  ;  that  Ireuieus  was 
mistaken  in  supposing  that  Polycarp  meant  the  Apostle 
when  he  only  meant  the  Presbyter ;  that,  if  this  be 
thought  impossible,  the  letter  of  Irenseus  to  Florinus 
must  be  regarded  as  a  forgery  ;^  that  this  "Presbyter," 
whose  very  existence  was  only  conjectured  a  century 
later,  is  quoted  as  an  oracle  by  Papias  ;  that  Polycrates, 
himself  Bishop  of  Ephesus  less  than  a  century  after 
John's  death,  made  the  same  preposterous  mistake 
which  is  attributed  to  Irensens ;  ^  and  that  nebulous  as 
he  is,  unknown  as  he  is  to  early  writers,  utterly  as 
every  fact  about  him  has  perished,  the  "  Presbyter " 
was  still  the  author  either  of  the  Gospel  and  Epistle, 
or  of  the  Apocalypse,  or  of  the  Second  and  Third 
Epistles,  or  of  all  these  writings  alike.  Credat  Judceua 
Apella — non  ego! 

But  the  impugners  of  St.  John's  Asiatic  work  raise 
one  or  two  chronological   difficulties.     They  say  that  if 


^  This  entirely  baseless  suggestiou  of  Scholteu  does  not  at  all  help  his 
cause,  for,  apart  from  the  letter  to  Florinus,  the  testimony  of  Irenseus,  in 
his  great  work,  Contra  Ilaereses,  is  quite  rlistiuct. 

2  Scholton  sets  aside  the  testimony  of  Polycrates.  because  lie  calls 
John  '•  a  priest  weai-ing  the  petalon''  But  (1)  It  is  by  no  means  impos- 
sible that  St.  John,  who,  at  one  period,  was  so  fond  of  symliols,  may  have 
adopted  this  symbol  to  express  the  truth  which  ho  so  prominently  states 
(Rev.  i.  6;  v.  10).  (2)  It  is  not  clear  that  Polycrates,  in  this  highly 
rhetorical  passage,  meant  his  words  to  be  taken  literally.  (3)  Even  if  he 
did,  he  may  have  been  misled  by  gi\ang  a  literal  meaning  to  some  metaphoi 
of  St.  John. 


THE    CONCLUSION.  681 

Irenseus  knew  Polycarp,  wlio  knew  St.  John,  all  three 
must  have  attained  to  extraordinary  longevity.  The 
longevity  need  not  have  been  very  unusual.  Tradition 
has  always  supposed  that  St.  John  reached  extreme 
old  age.  Supposing  that  he  died  as  early  as  a.d.  90, 
and  that  Irenseus  wrote  about  a.d.  180,  then,  as  M. 
Renan  remarks,  the  difference  which  separated  the  two 
would  be  the  same  as  that  which  separates  us  from  the 
last  years  of  Voltaire.  Yet,  without  any  miracle  of 
longevity,  M.  de  Remusat  had  often  conversed  about 
Voltaire  with  I'Abbe  Morellet,  who  had  actually  known 
him.  If  the  martyrdom  of  Polycarp  took  place,  as 
Mr.  "Waddington  seems  to  have  proved,  about  a.d.  155,^ 
Polycarp  was  then  86  years  old.  Consequently  he 
must  have  been  born  in  a.d.  69,  and  would  have  been 
at  least  21  years  old  when  St.  John  died,  and  there  is 
no  difficulty  in  the  supposition  that  Irenseus,  as  a  boy, 
had  seen  and  known  a  man  who  had  conversed  with 
the  Apostle  who  had  laid  his  head  on  Jesus'  breast. 

A  credulous  spirit  of  innovation  is  welcome  to  be- 
lieve and  to  proclaim  that  any  or  all  of  St.  John's 
writings  were  written  by  "  John  the  Presbyter."  They 
were  :  but  "  John  the  Presbyter "  is  none  other  than 
John  the  Apostle.^ 

'  Mem.  de  VlnsUtut,  xxvi.  235. 

'  This  argumeut  has  already  been  printed  in  the  Expositor,  because  I 
wished  to  subject  it  to  the  test  of  criticism.  Some  of  my  arguments  about 
the  "  Beast "  and  the  "  False  Prophet  "  have,  for  the  same  reason,  appeared 
in  the  same  admirable  journal.  I  am  allowed,  by  the  kindness  of  Messrs. 
Hoddfir  and  Stoughton,  to  use  the  same  material  here. 


INDEX. 


Aaron — the  first  High  Priest,  as  de- 
scribed by  the  Son  of  Sirach,  ii. 
550  et  seq. 

Abel — an  example  of  faith,  i.  460  ;  his 
subject  of  dispute  with  Cain,  467  ; 
murdered  by  his  brother,  ii.  437  ; 
referred  to  in  Book  of  Enoch,  518. 

Abgar — King  of  Edessa,  i.  83. 

Abarbanel  and  others  respecting  the 
Tables  in  the  Ark,  i.  419. 

Abraham — the  trial  of  his  faith,  ii.  38 
et  seq.  ;  known  throughout  the  East 
as  '"the  friend  of  God,"  54;  his 
example  as  adduced  by  Paul  and  by 
James,  bo. 

Absalom— a  scurriloiia  epithet  of  the 
Talmud,  i.  390. 

Acesius — his  views  on  mortal  sin,  i. 
355. 

Adam — a  Kabbalistic  inference  drawn 
from  the  name,  i.  356. 

Adeiphotheon,  i.  547  ;  ii.  33. 

Advent — The  Second,  vagaries  respect- 
ing the,  ii.  '2"29. 

MWa,  Capitolina  and  the  abrogation  of 
Judaism,  i.  541  ;  ii.  331. 

Aeiparthenia  defined  and  discussed,  i. 
500. 

Agapae,  or  Love-feasts,  i.  199. 

Agrapha  dogmata,  or  unrecorded  say- 
ings of  Christ,  ii.  166. 

Agrippa  I. — his  antipathy  to  the  Cliris- 
tians,  i.  532 ;  ii.  8 ;  the  patron  of 
Ishmael  ben  Phabi,  ii.  70. 

Agrippina — daughter  of  Germanicus, 
i.  23  ;  born  at  Cologne,  24  ;  married 
(1)  to  Gn.  Dom.  Ahenobarbus,  by 
whom  she  became  mother  of  Nero, 
ibid. ;  banished  to  Pontia,  and 
their  property  confiscated,  25  ; 
afterwards  married  to  Crispus 
Passienus,  26 ;  and  afterwards  to 
her  uncle  the  Emperor  Claudius, 
27 ;   she  procures  the  adoption   of 


Nero,  her  own  son,  to  the  preju- 
dice of  the  heir-apjiarent,  29  ;  she 
poisons  her  husband,  33 ;  procures 
the  Imperial  purple  for  Nero,  34; 
and  is  by  liiin  dignified  as  "  the 
best  of  mothers,"  ihiil.  ;  but  even- 
tually assassinated  by  his  orders,  47. 

Akhiva — his  martyrdom  by  the  Ro- 
mans, ii.  54,  83. 

Alexander  the  Great— his  patronage  of 
the  Jews,  i.  253. 

Alexandria — its  natural  advantages,  i. 
252 ;  its  synagogue,  253  ;  its  Sanhe- 
drin,  254 ;  its  artificers  and  the 
Temple  at  Jerusalem,  254;  its 
epoch-making  literature,  255  et  seq.  ; 
the  Septuagint,  256—261  ;  the 
writings  of  Aristobulus,  262  et  seq.  ; 
the  Book  of  Wisdom,  263;  its 
Philonic  literature,  264 ;  its  part 
in  paving  the  way  for  Christianity, 
278 ;  catechetical  school  at,  279 ; 
its  Anti-Gnostic  aims,  280 ;  thco- 
sophy,  281  et  seq. ;  its  views  on 
inspiration,  287 ;  its  iufiuence  ou 
the  Pauline  Epistles,  288;  other 
contributions  to  Christianity,  306  ; 
its  indebtedness  to  Plato,  315  ;  Bar- 
nabas regarded  as  the  founder  of 
the  Church  of,  333 ;  Apollos  a  na- 
tive of,  337 ;  certain  Jews  of, 
burned  alive,  an  event  possibly 
alluded  to  in  Heb.  xi.  37,  461. 

Alexandrianism — indications  of,  in  the 
writings  of  John  and  Paul,  i.  91. 

Aliturus,  the  court-jest(!r  of  Nero,  a 
Jewish  jDroselyte,  i.  62 ;  ii.  307. 

Allegory  and  its  developments,  i.  282 
et  seq. 

AlphfEus  identified  with  James  in  the 
Church  of  England  Scripture 
lessons,  i.  492  ;  but  contra-dis- 
tinguished by  the  Greek  Church, 
Had. 


584 


INDEX. 


Altar  of  Tnconsoand  the  Holiest  I'lucn, 
ii.  54.')  il  ,vq. 

Amalthcii's  Iforn — mentioned  in  the 
Saj)tii;igint,  i.  259. 

Amhaaretz — its  definition,  use,  etc.,  ii. 
108. 

Anagram  of  malediction  upon  the 
name  Jesus,  i.  390. 

Andreas  (Bi).) — his  comment  on  Reve- 
lation referred  to,  ii.  290. 

Andrew — his  travels,  mission,  and 
martyrdom,  i.  85. 

Aneling- — a  practice  of  the  early  Church 
provided  for  in  the  first  Prayer- 
book  of  Edward  VI.,  ii.  74. 

Angel  of  Death  and  R.  bar  Nachman, 
ii.  340. 

Angels — the  fallen,  Enoch's  mission  to 
thorn,  i.  234 ;  their  sin  as  tradi- 
tionally recorded,  239,  ii.  522; 
ministering,  their  service  at  Sinai, 
i.  408;  tlie  angelic  heptarchy,  i. 
238,  ii.  258:  angel  of  death, i.'232, 
361,  ii.  66,  340. 

Annas  the  j'ounger  and  the  martyrdom 
of  James,  i.  549 ;  himself  ci-uelly 
murdereil  by  his  own  co-religionists, 
557,  ii.  211  ;  and  his  remains  dis- 
honoured, 211,  276. 

Antichrist — Tiie  rise  of,  i.  17;  identi- 
fied with  Nero,  18,  ii.  192,  etc. ;  the 
Antichrist  of  Old  Testament  Aj^o- 
calypse,  i.  57,  ii.  192;  a  term 
peculiar  to  John,  425  et  seq. 

Antilegonu'va,  or  disputed  Books  of 
Scripture,  i.  220,  ii.  483.  (<S'ce  also 
Homolofioumcna.) 

Antinomianism- — a  travesty  of  Pauline 
doctrine,  i.  90. 

Antioch  and  the  origination  of  the 
term  Christian,  i.  147. 

Antiochus  Epiphanes — the  Antichrist 
of  Daniel,  i.  57,  ii.  192. 

Apocalypse  of  John  the  Divine,  not 
the  latest  hook  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment Scriptures,  ii.  179  ;  dates  next 
in  order  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels, 
183  et  seq. ;  its  originating  circum- 
stances, 189;  Nero  depicted,  190; 
persecution  of  the  Christians,  191 
et  seq.  ;  outbreak  of  Jewish  War, 
192('<.S'Y/.  ;  siegeof  J(>nisalem,  193; 
other  historical  surroundings,  195 
— 221  ;  reception  of  the  work,  223 
et  stq ;  the  various  schools  of 
interpretation,  227  ;  discussed  in 
detail,  228—238;  letters  to  the 
seven  churches,  239 — 242  ;  the 
Apostolic  twelve,  243  ;  its  animad- 


versions, 244—247  ;  the  seals,  248 ; 
the  first  seal,  249  ;  the  second,  250  ; 
the  third,  251  et  seq.  ;  the  fourth, 
253  el  seq.;  the  fifth,  254;  the 
sixth,  255;  the  sealing,  257;  the 
seven  tnunijets,  258 — 260  ;  detailed 
with  historic  illustrations,  260 — 
270 ;  an  interlude,  270 ;  the  seven 
thunders,  271 ;  the  witnesses,  273 
—  275 ;  forecast  of  the  doom  of 
Jerusalem,  276  et  seq.  ;  the  wild 
beast  of  the  sea,  278 — 288;  identi- 
fied with  Nero,  289  et  seq. ;  the 
mystic  number  666,  291—300;  the 
false  i)rophet,  301  et  seq. ;  illu.stra- 
tions  from  Roman  history,  309 — 
316;  the  vials,  317  et  seq.;  fall  of 
Jerusalem,  325  et  seq. ;  the  end  of 
the  dispensation,  329  ;  and  abroga- 
tion of  Judaism,  331  et  seq. 

Apocalyptic  literature — Apocalypse  of 
Earuch,  ii.  166,  222;  of  Esdras,  ii. 
174;  of  Peter,  i.  178. 

Apoery]ihal  Gospels — the  Protevan- 
gelion,  i.  507 ;  Gospel  of  Joseph, 
ibid. ;  of  Thomas,  508  ;  to  Hebrews, 
529 ;  apocryphal  works  attributed 
to  John,  ii.  180.  Books  —  the 
Ascension  of  Moses,  i.  200,  232, 
238,  241 ;  of  Isaiah,  ii.  269,  290, 
312  ;  of  James,  i.  541  ;  the  Assump- 
tion of  Moses,  ii.  523.  {See  also 
s.v.  I'aruabas,  and  other  distinctive 
names.) 

Apollos — the  probable  author  of  He- 
brews, i.  91  ;  acquainted  with 
Philonian  philosophy,  279,  304; 
his  method  of  interpretation,  305 ; 
compares  favourably  with  that  of 
Philo,  306—310;  contrasted  witli 
that  of  Paul,  311—329;  ten  quali- 
fications for  writing  such  an 
epistle,  330  et  seq.  ;  all  exemplified 
in  Apollos,  336  ;  sketch  of  his  cha- 
racter, ihid. ;  notices  of  him  and  his 
work  in  New  Testament,  336  et 
seq.;  his  native  place  and  early 
home,  337 ;  no  hint  that  he  ever 
visited  Rome,  344 ;  last  Scriptural 
mention  of  his  name,  345.  (See 
s.v.  Hebrews.) 

Apostasv — as  regarded  by  the  com- 
piler of  the  Mishnah,  i.  432. 

Apotheosis  of  Claudius  Caesar,  i.  36 ; 
of  Caligula  and  Nero,  ii.  288 ;  of 
the  Roman  Emperors  generally, 
311. 

Aquila  and  Priscilla — their  departure 
from  Rome,  i.  19. 


INDEX. 


585 


Aquila — his  Greek  version  of  the  Old 
Testament,  i.  213  ;  accredited  with 
the  authorship  of  Hebrews,  332. 

Archangels— Jude  and  John  the  only 
New  Testament  writers  who  men- 
tion them,  i.  238  ;  the  seven  accord- 
ing to  Apocryphal  books  and  the 
Talmud,  ibid,  (note) ;  the  hierarchy, 
according  to  fourth  Esdras,  351. 

Arctas,  King  of  Arabia — his  adven- 
ture with  the  high  priest  Ishmael, 
i.  410. 

Ai-isteas  and  the  origin  of  the  Septua- 
gint,  i.  256. 

Aristion,  as  mentioned  in  the  writings 
of  Papias,  ii.  555  et  seq. 

Ark  and  Tables  of  the  Covenant,  i.  416 
et  seq. 

Arminian  perversions  of  Scripture,  i. 
385. 

Arthur  and  King  John — parallel  from 
Homan  histor}',  i.  39. 

Asiiiaru — a  satirical  term  applied  to 
early  Christians,  i.  66,  148;  the 
Jews  similarly  slandered,  66,  417. 

Atonement,  Day  of — as  regarded  by 
Barnabas,  i.  105:  its  paramount 
place  in  Judaism,  326 ;  Rabbinic 
ceremonies,  ii.  547  et  seq.;  im- 
pressions on  Jewish  minds,  549  ;  its 
connexion  with  the  overthrow  of 
Judaism,  550  ;  traditional  reminis- 
cences, 551  et  seq. 

Augurs  and  Auguries — their  preva- 
lence, ii.  305. 

Augustus — his  aversion  to  deification, 
ii.  288  ;  his  edicts  against  sorcerers, 
etc.,  304. 

Aulus  Plautius  and  Christianity  in 
Britain,  i.  58. 

Aureum  Quinqucnniuni  of  Rome,  i.  37. 

Autos  da  Fe  and  Te  Deums,  ii. 
58. 

Avodath  Hakkodesh — a  KabbaUstic 
work  quoted,  i.  399. 

Azazel  and  the  scape-goat  of  Jewry,  i. 
434,  u.  547,  552. 


B. 


Babylon  —  covertly  referred  to  by 
Jeremiah,  ii.  297 ;  figuratively 
applied  in  1  Peter,  514,  517. 

Balaam — Legend  of,  alluded  to  in  the 
Septuagint  and  the  Targum,  i. 
114;  his  apostasy,  183;  compared 
•with  the  impious  and  false,   197  ; 


with  evil-doers  generally,  200 ;  how 
slain  by  Pliinehas,  260. 
Bamidbar     Rabba — a    Rabbinic  com- 
mentary on  Numbers,  i.  374. 
Barachias,  Son  of — probably  an  erro- 
neous gloss,  ii.  211. 
Barcochba,    a    false    Messiah    of    the 
Jews — his  aversion  to  Christians,  i. 
64  ;  shares  in  their  persecution  and 
massacre,  ii.  331. 
Barnabas— his   Epistle,   its    drift  and 
tone,  i.    95 ;   publicly  read  in   the 
Church,  101 ;  its  marked  inferiority 
to   the  canonical    Scriptures,   104 ; 
Alexandrian     proclivities,     104    et 
seq. ;  its  Kabbalistic  vagaries  and 
heretical  tendencies,    105 ;    quoted 
or  referred  to,  i.   104  et  seq.,  156, 
340. 
Bartholomew — his    mission-work    and 

martyrdom,  i.  85. 
Basilical  Synagogue  at  Alexandria,  i. 
2o3  et  seq.  ;  said  to  have  been  the 
grandest  in  the  world,  the  glory  of 
Israel,  254. 
Bath   Kol,  or  voice  from  Heaven,  i. 

537. 
Berenice    (Queen)  —  her    intercession 

for  the  Jews,  ii.  203. 
Bereshith    Rabba— a    Rabbinic    com- 
mentary    on    Genesis     quoted    or 
referred  to,  i.  258,  394,  396,  401,  ii. 
327,  371,  544. 
Beruriah,  the  wife  of  Rabbi  Meier— her 

praiseworthy  advice,  ii.  476. 
Blood — no  remission  without,  parallel 

from  the  Talmud,  i.  428. 
Brethren  of  the  Lord,  i.  223. 
Burning   of   Rome— possible   reminis- 
cences   in    St.    Peter's   Epistle,   i. 
65. 
Burrus     (Afranius) — a     partisan     of 
Agrippina,   i.    31;    by   her    made 
Prtetorian   Prfefect    and   guardian 
of    the    youthful    Nero,    33;    his 
influence  for  good  over  his  ward, 
37  ;    his    reprehensible    laxity    in 
certain   matters,    38 ;   his   compro- 
mise, 45 ;  eventually  poisoned  by 
order  of  the  Emperor,  who  was  so 
much  indebted  to  him,  49. 


Caesar  (see  distinctive  names). 
Caesarian    race— its    premature    mor- 
taUty,  i.  18,  22. 


'>F6 


INDEX. 


Cain — his  parentage  according  to  the 
Kal)bis,  ii.  437. 

Calvin's  perversions  of  Holy  "Writ,  i. 
384. 

"  Camel  and  needle's  ej-e  "  explained, 
i.  386. 

Carthage— Councils  of,  i.  179,ii.  2,  .534. 

Catacombs  at  Rome,  i.  1.5,  148,  166. 

Catholic — definition  of  the  term,  i.  92. 

Catholic  Epistles — Gregory  of  Nazian- 
zus  upon,  ii.  483. 

Cato  the  younger — his  character  de- 
scribed, ii.  434. 

Cjntre  of  the  earth  from  a  Rabbinic 
point  of  view,  i.  418,  543. 

Cerinthus  — a  Jud;eo-Christian  heresi- 
arch,  i.  205 ;  the  immorality  of  his 
system,  243;  taught  in  Asia,  ii. 
153;  accredited  by  Dionysius  of 
Alexandria  with  the  writing  of  the 
Apocalypse,  154  ;  he  was  the 
earliest  of  the  Christian  Gnostics, 
162 ;  the  story  of  his  death  at 
Ephesus,  164  ;  his  heretical  views 
and  legendary  associations,  ii.  347 
—350. 

Charlemagne  and  the  pirate  Norse- 
men, i,  208. 

Chiliasts  or  Millenarians,  i.  90. 

Xfs,  the  mystic  symbol  for  666,  ii.  295. 

Chrestos  and  Christos,  an  interesting 
paronomasia,  i.  158. 

Chrestus— a  perverted  form  of  Chiistus, 
i.  19  ;  the  notion  that  Chrestus  was  a 
seditious  Roman  Jew,  20 ;  Chrestian, 
a  parody  upon  the  term  Chrii-tian, 
171 ;  possibly  alluded  to  by  Peter, 
ibid. 

Christ — name  ironically  turned  to 
Chrestus,  i.  19;  styled  Christus 
by  Tacitus,  60 ;  His  life  and  work 
objectively  treated  in  the  sj-noptic 
Gospels,  87  ;  but  subjectively  by 
John,  88;  though  scarcely  alluded 
to  by  James,  132  ;  His  example, 
sufferings,  death,  resurrection,  and 
ascension  are  dwelt  upon  by  Peter, 
ibid.;  His  mission  to  the  spirits  in 
prison,  139—142,  168—170;  the 
Desposyni,  descendants  of  the 
family  at  Nazareth,  222—225 ;  the 
redemption  scheme,  322— 324;  the 
atonement,  325;  superior  to  angels, 
351 — 354  ;  pre-eminent  to  Moses, 
362  ;  High  Priesthood  of,  368—370; 
above  that  of  the  Lcvites,  371 ;  and 
Melchizedek,  408;  various  points 
of  supremacy,  437 — 440  ;  Hisatcm- 
ing  blood,  441 ;  His  perfect  obedi- 


ence, 442  ef  seq.;  recapitulation  of 
the  phases  of  superiority,  444  et 
seq.;  the  Second  Advent,  ii.  328 ; 
end  of  the  Jlosaic  dispensation, 
329 ;  abrogation  of  Judaism,  331  : 
a  denier  of  Jesus  is  Antichrist,  352  ; 
knowledge  of  Christ  is  life  eternal, 
367 ;  the  doi'trine  of  the  Logos 
(the  Divine  Word)  considered,  369. 

Christ — disgui>ed  references  to,  in  the 
Talmud  and  Rabbinic  writings,  ii. 
516. 

Christendom  and  Heathendom  con- 
trasted, i.  107. 

Christians — until  Nero's  time,  never 
brought  into  collision  with  the 
Imperial  government,  i.  19;  Ne- 
ronian  persecution,  57  et  seq.  ; 
suffered  through  jealousy,  63 ; 
Jewish  malice  the  primary  cause 
of  their  persecution,  64  ;  regarded 
by  the  world  as  a  debased  Jewish 
sect,  147;  the  name  "Christian" 
originated  at  Antioch.i'Airf.;  "every- 
where spoken  against,"  148; taunted 
as  renegades  and  apostates,  347  ; 
took  refuge  at  Pella  in  prospect  of 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  ii.  148,  193, 
280 ;  persecuted  by  Barcochba,  ii. 
331. 

Christianity — a  religio  iUicitn  at  Rome, 
i.  121 ;  as  regarded  by  Pliny  and 
Tacitus,  148  ;  its  relations  to  Juda- 
ism, 303 ;  its  superiority  to  Philo- 
nian  philosophy,  307  ;  more  ancient 
than  Judaism,  312;  referred  to 
Abraham  by  Paul,  and  to  Mel- 
chizedek by  Apollos,  313;  a  rever- 
sion to  Judaii^m  the  worst  kind  of 
apostasy,  314  ;  in  what  its  pre- 
eminence consists,  317,322;  Judaic 
Christianity  predisposed  to  Phari- 
saism, 551  ;  the  Sadducees  its  mo^t 
extreme  opponents,  ibid. 

Christology  ot  Paul,  i.  321  ct  seq.;  of 
Apollos  and  of  John,  322. 

Chrysostom,  his  noble  resolution  in 
prospect  of  exile  and  martvrdom, 
i.  106. 

Cities  of  the  plain — their  overthrow, 
i.  200,  231,  237. 

Claudius — his  edict  for  the  expulsion 
of  the  Jews  from  Rome,  i.  19. 

( 'leanthes,  the  Stoic  philosopher,  his 
death  by  suicide,  i.  14. 

Clement  of  Alexandria — his  account  of 
Peter's  family,  i.  112;  in  favour  of 
1st  Epistle  of  Peter,  122;  his  literary 
labours  referred  to,  143,  107,  178, 


INDEX. 


587 


180,  217,  243,  279;  on  the  Pauline 
authorship  of  Hebrews,  290 ;  un- 
acquainted with  Epistle  of  James, 
ii.  1  ;  his  story  of  John  and  the 
robber,  169—172;  the  martyrdom 
of  the  apostles,  177. 

Clement  of  Rome — his  epistle  public!}' 
read  in  the  church,  i.  101  ;  sj^n- 
cretism  of  the  writer,  102;  his 
catholicity,  theology,  and  his  mis- 
taken notions,  103;  the  evidential 
value  of  his  writing,  104;  Bishop 
of  Rome,  116  ;  speaks  more  of  Paul 
than  of  Peter,  117  ;  though  said  to 
have  been  ordained  by  the  latter, 
118;  his  definition  of  faith,  136; 
makes  no  reference  to  2nd  Epistle 
of  Peter,  178  ;  his  various  writings 
mentioned,  212,  217;  the  Book  of 
Wisdom  and  Hebrews  known  to 
him,  322  ;  accredited  by  some  with 
the  authorship  of  the  latter,  334 ; 
made  use  of  Epistle  of  James,  ii.  2  ; 
quotation  made  from  his  writings, 
65  ;  his  record  of  Peter's  martyr- 
dom, 512. 

Clementine  Homilies  and  Recogni- 
tions— the  product  of  Ebionites,  i. 
96 ;  their  disfavour  of  visions,  212 ; 
their  polemic  character,  ii.  28; 
their  animus  against  Paul,  80 ; 
allusions  to  Peter's  connection  with 
Rome,  514. 

Cleopas  an  abbreviation  of  Cleopater, 
i.  491. 

Cleopatra,  the  wife  of  the  Procurator 
Florus,  a  friend  of  the  Empress 
Poppjea,  ii.  201. 

Clopas,  Chalpai  or  Alphoeus,  i.  491. 

Coincidences  (undesigned)  between  the 
account  in  Acts  and  the  writings  of 
James,  ii.  35. 

( 'omforter — true  meaning  of  word  so 
rendered,  ii.  410  et  seq.;  Talmudic 
adoption  of  the  original  word,  411. 

(Commandments,  theTen— Philo's  idea 
that  they  were  uttered  by  Cod,  and 
the  rest  of  the  Law  by  angels,  i. 
352  ;  Talmudic  notion  that  the  first 
Commandment  only  was  spoken  by 
God,  and  the  others  were  uttered 
by  the  angels,  358. 

Compassion  deprecated  by  the  Romans, 
i.  14. 

Confession  in  sickness  a  Jewish  as 
well  as  a  Christian  ordinance,  ii. 
74  et  seq. 

( 'omelius  a  Lapide — his  summary  deal- 
ings with  heretics,  ii.  504. 


Cremation — the  Empress  Poppaca'-s  ob- 
jection to,  i.  63. 

Crispus  Passienus,  the  father-in-law  of 
Nero,  i.  26. 

Cromwell  and  final  perseverance,  i.  384. 

Crusades  referred  to,  ii.  121. 

Cryptographs — Jewish  and  Christian, 
i.  83,  390,  ii.  291,  516. 

Custom — its  force  in  Rabbinic  J  udaism, 
i.  290. 


I). 


Daniel— -Book  of,  known  to  Peter,  i. 
154  ;  his  predictions  of  the  fate  of 
Rome,  how  treated  in  Josophus,  ii. 
236. 

Days,  the  Ten  Penitential,  of  modem 
Judaism,  i.  432. 

Debarim  Rabba,  a  Rabbinic  commen- 
tary on  Deuteronomy,  ii.  66. 

Deification  of  Poppasa,  the  murdered 
wife  of  Nero,  i.  15. 

Descent  into  Hades,  i.  167 — 169. 

DesposjTii,  The,  or  relations  of  the 
Holy  Family,  i.  221  et  seq.,  506._ 

Diaspora — the  Hellenistic  designation 
of  the  Dispersed  Jews,  i.  152,  ii. 
34.     {See  also  Galootha.) 

DiatheJci — classical  sense  of  the  word, 
its  use  in  a  twofold  sense  in  the 
Hebrews,  i.  424,  425 ;  Rabbinic 
adoption  and  use  of  the  word,  426. 

Dikaisune  in  judicial  and  in  Scrip- 
tural nomenclature,  i.  320. 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  ii.  566 — 568. 

Divorce — the  first  on  record  in  the 
annals  of  Rome,  i.  7. 

Domine,  quo  vadis  ?   i.  114. 

Domitia,  aunt  and  guardian  of  Nero, 
i.  25  ;  her  neglect  of  her  charge, 
ibid.  ;  incurs  the  jealousy  of  Agrip- 
pina,  31  ;  accused  of  sorcery  and 
doomed  to  death,  32. 

Domitian — his  advinture  with  the 
Desposyni,  the  grandsons  of  Jude, 
i.  221  et  seq.;  his  banishment  of 
John  to  Patmos,  ii.  184  et  seq. 

Domitius  Ahenobarbus,  father  of  Nero 
— his  character,  his  ominous  saying 
at  Nero's  birth,  his  banishment  tor 
treason,  and  the  confiscation  of  his 
property,  i.  25. 


Ebionites — an  early  heretical  sect,  i. 
90  ;  claimed  the  authority  of  James, 


588 


INDEX. 


94 ;   attempt  to  calumniato  Paul, 

115;  their  views  aud  j^iuctices,  ii. 

343  et  scq. 
Emperors  of  Rome — their  autocratic 

position,  i.  6 ;  their  moral  charac- 

t(>ristics,    14  ;   jncinature  death,  ii. 

264  ;  their  deilieution,  288. 
Encaenia,  the  feast  of  Dedication,   i. 

428. 
Enoch,  Book  of — referred  to  by  Peter 

and  Jude,  i.  201.     (6'ee  also  Excur- 
sus W.  and  Index  to  Enoch.) 
Ephcsian  Kolibcr,  a  legend  of  the  early 

Church,  ii.  175. 
Ephesians,  Epistle  to — its  style,  i.  186  ; 

its  intiuence  upon  I.  Peter,  188. 
Epictetus     the     philosopher,     saying 

quoted,  i.  450. 
Epinienidcs,   Aratus,    and   Menander, 

Paul's  quotation  of,  i,  241. 
Epii^hany   at  Sinai — how  represented 

in  the  Soptuagint,  i.  261. 
Epistles,  the  Catholic,  i.  92.     {See  also 

under  respective  names.) 
Epistles,  the  Uncanonical — the  Epistle 

of  Barnabas,  i.  104—106,  156,  340  ; 

Epistle  of  Clement,   i.    102—104; 

Epistle  of  Ignatius,  i.  392,  ii.   344, 

402,  507;  Epistle  of  Polycarp,  ii. 

242,  399. 
Ethnic      inspiration — exemplified     in 

Socrates,   Plato,  &c.,  i.  286  ct  scq.  ; 

in    heathen    literature    generally, 

315. 
Euripides — Nero's  significant  comment 

upon  a  verse  of,  i.  52. 
Eusebius'    quotation   of  a  non-extant 

passage  of  Josephus,  i.  553  et  s'-q. 
Eutropius    concerning  the  burning  of 

Rome,  i.  52. 
Exodus — a  term  used  for  death  in  Jose- 
phus, in  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  and 

in  Peter,  i.  204. 


F. 


Faith— as  defined  by  Peter,  i.  136; 
by  Clement,  ihid.;  by  Paul,  318; 
by  Philo  Judieus,  319;  by  the 
author  of  Hebrews,  ihid.;  of  Abra- 
ham, as  recorded  in  Rabbinic  story, 
ii.  93. 

Famine — at  Rome,  temp.  Claudius,  ii. 
251  ;  another  in  time  of  Otho,  252 ; 
at  Jerusalem  during  the  final  siege, 
ibid. 

Fast — the  consummate,  of  the  Jcwi.sli 


calendar,  i.  431 ;  the  bi-weekly  fast 
of  New  Testament  times,  ibid. 

Felix,  Roman  Procurator  of  Judaea,  i. 
27. 

Festus  the  Procurator  defends  Paul, 
i.  20 ;  his  official  character  rela- 
tively considered,  549. 

Filioli,  dili(jile  alterutrum,  the  favourite 
words  of  John,  ii.  175,  510. 

Final  perseverance,  i.  384,  451. 

Forbidden  books  of  Jewry,  i.  517. 

Foundation  stone  of  the  world,  i.  417 
et  seq. 


G. 


Gains  (Caligula) — his  animosity  to  the 
Jews,  i.  19. 

Gaius  of  Corinth  and  others  of  the 
same  name  discriminated,  ii.  506. 

Galatians,  Epistle  to — its  style  rela- 
tively considered,  i.  186  ;  its  date, 
ii.  8. 

Gallio,  the  Proconsul — his  refusal  to 
convict  Paul,  i.  20. 

Galootha,  The — the  Aramaic  designa- 
tion of  the  dispersed  Jews,  i. 
152. 

Gamaliel  I. — counteracts  the  avarice 
of  the  priests,  ii.  14  ;  interferes  on 
behalf  of  the  Apostles,  139. 

Gamaliel  II. — his  characteristic  com- 
promise at  the  baths  of  Ptolemais, 
ii.  163. 

Ghetto  or  Jewry — of  Ancient  Rome,  i. 
19;  of  Alexandria,  253. 

Geinatria — the  term  explained,  ii.  291 ; 
vainous  exemplifications,  i.  105, 
432,  ii.  291—299. 

Gcrizim — its  place  in  the  Samaritan 
cult,  i.  332. 

Germanicus,  grandfather  of  Nero,  i. 
22;  his  tragic  end,  ibid. 

Gladiatorial  shows  at  Rome,  i.  9 ;  of 
Nero's  time,  with  Christian  vic- 
tims, 68  et  seq. 

Gospels,  the  Synoptic — mainly  present 
the  historical  aspect  of  Christ's  life, 
i.  87 ;  their  fragmentary  nature, 
88  ;  John's  Gospel  presents  subjec- 
tive aspect  mainly,  ibid.;  James 
never  mentions  the  Gospel,  94  ;  the 
Gospel  j)reached  to  the  dead,  138-- 
143. 

Gospels,  the  Uncanonical,  see  Apocrj'- 
phal  Gospels. 

Grajfiti  or  caricatures  at  Pompeii,  i. 
148. 


INDEX. 


689 


Greek  proverb  addressed  from  Heaven 
to  Paul,  i.  287. 

Greek  Versions  of  the  Old  Testament, 
see  Aquila,  and  Septuagint. 

Greek  wisdom  and  the  Palestinian 
KahLis,  i.  2.57 ;  how  regarded  by 
the  Babylonian  Jew.s,  258 ;  its 
effect  on  Judaism  generally,  31o. 

Gregory  of  Nazianzus— alone  among 
Christian  wi-iters  after  St.  John 
worthily  styled  "  The  Divine,"  ii. 
239  ;  his  views  as  to  the  Catholic 
Epistles,  483. 


H. 


Habakkuk — his  summary  of  the  pre- 
cepts, i.  4.50. 

Hades — Christ's  descent  into,  i.  167 — 
169. 

Hagadah  and  Halachah — their  occur- 
rence in  the  Septuagint,  i.  2.59 : 
alike  familiar  to  the  writer  of 
Hebrews,  430 ;  compiled  by  E. 
Judah,  forming  the  Mishnah,  .511; 
how  regarded  by  the  Rabbis,  537. 

Hagadistic  traces — in  Jude,  i.  93,  232 
et  seq.,  238—241,  516,  ii.  520—524; 
in  Paul,  i.  288  ;  in  Hebrews,  i.  310  ; 
not  any  to  be  found  in  James,  i. 
517. 

Hapax  legomena — in  1  Peter,  i.  132  ;  in 
2  Peter,  184  et  seq.;  in  Jude,  236 ; 
in  Hebrews,  350  ;  in  James  ii.  23. 

Haphtarah  and  Parashah,  interesting 
identifications  respecting  the,  i. 
256. 

Heathendom — its  salient  features,  i. 
14 ;  contrasted  with  Christianity, 
107. 

Heavenly  witnesses,  the  three,  ii. 
457. 

Hebrew  unkno\sTi  to  Philo  Judseus, 
i.  264. 

Hebrews,  Epistle  to— the  work  of 
ApoUos,  i.  91 ;  an  expression  of 
Alexandrian  Christianity,  ibid.  ;  a 
link  binding  us  to  the  Church  of 
the  Jewish  Fathers,  285 ;  not 
-written  by  Paul,  288—294  ;  attri- 
buted to  him  in  the  superscription 
in  the  English  Bible,  ibid.  ;  and 
twice  in  the  Prayer  Book,  ibid. ; 
its  resemblances  to  Paulino  writing 
considered,  295 ;  its  dissimilarity 
thereto,  297—300  ;  its  theological 
scope,  301 ;  its  dealing  with  the 
relations  of  Christianity  and  Juda- 


ism, 303 ;  its  marked  Alo.\.andrian- 
ism,  304 — 306  ;  coincidences  with 
Philonian  literature,  307—310; 
topical  detail,  311 — 329;  account 
of  the  author,  336  et  seq. ;  to 
whom  addressed,  342 — 344  ;  where 
written,  344  et  seq.  ;  outline,  346 — 
348 ;  analysis,  with  literal  version 
and  commentary,  349 — 480;  sub- 
jects embraced:  Christ's  suprem- 
acy, 351 — 358;  man's  position,  359 
et  seq.;  mission  of  Christ,  361  et 
seq.  ;  Christ  above  Moses,  etc.,  363 
et  seq. ;  exhortation  to  prompt 
acceptance,  365 — 357  ;  priesthood 
of  Christ  and  Melehizedek  com- 
pared and  contrasted,  368 — 408  ; 
the  Levitical  priesthood  and  its 
service  superseded,  409 — 413;  the 
new  Covenant,  414;  the  Taber- 
nacle and  its  symbolic  furniture, 
415 — 421  ;  Christ  their  Antitype, 
422 — 424  ;  the  Day  of  Atonement, 
431—435;  Christ  the  true  High 
Priest,  436 — 440 ;  summing  up, 
440 — 445  ;  danger  of  apostasy, 
448 — -450  :  faith  defined  and  exem- 
plified, 451 — 461 ;  final  admoni- 
tions, 461—480. 

Herculaneum  and  its  relics,  i.  2,  5. 

Heresy  defined,  misconceptions  con- 
sidered, ii.  336  et  .seq. 

Hermas,  a  post-Apostolic  writer — his 
works,  "The  Pastor,"  etc.,  referred 
to,  i.  155,  178;  quoted,  ii.  37,  57, 
65,  167,  267. 

Herod  Agrippa  I.  and  the  murder  of 
James,  i.  532,  ii.  140. 

Hesiod's  story  of  the  imprisoned 
Titans,  i.  231, 

Hexameter  verse  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, i.  464,  ii.  39. 

High  Priests  under  the  first  and 
second  Temples  compared,  i.  326 
et  seq. ;  degradation  of  the  office, 
374  ;  mere  nominees  of  the  rulers, 
ibid.  {See  also  Ishmael  ben  Phabi, 
Joshua  ben  Gamala,  Simon  son  of 
Onias,  etc.) 

Hillel  and  Shammai,  the  leaders  of 
Jewish  thought  in  the  time  of  our 
Lord,  i.  512,  514,  525. 

Hippo,  ecclesiastical  council  of,  i. 
179. 

Holy  of  Holies — Caligula's  attempt  to 
profane,  i.  19  ;  Pompoy's  sur[)rise 
to  find  it  empty,  416;  how  often 
entered  by  High  Priest  on  Day  of 
Atonement,  422. 


INDEX. 


Homolofioumena,  or  admitted  books  of 
Holy  Writ,  i.  400,  and  see  Aiitile- 
gonuna. 

Hymn,  early  Christian — quoted,  i.  81. 


Icarus — his  fatal  attempt  to  fly,  i.  70, 
116. 

Idolatry— the  closing  words  (chrono- 
logically) of  the  New  Testament  a 
warning  against,  ii.  182. 

IHT  in  Judu'o-C'hristian  symbolism, 
i.  105,  ii.  292. 

Incjimation,  the,  as  restricted  by 
Apollos,  i.  303. 

Infanticide — its  prevalence  in  Imperial 
Koine,  i.  11 ;  contrary  to  Chiistian 
usa,%c8,  107. 

Insulce  of  Ancient  Eome,  i.  4. 

Irenaius — his  strange  assertion  as  to 
the  age  of  our  Lord,  ii.  108. 

Isaac  and  his  substitute — a  Kabbiuie 
legend,  i.  238. 

Isaiah — his  martyrdom  under  Manas- 
seh,  i.  461. 

Ishmael,  the  High  Priest — his  decade 
of  office,  ii.  13 ;  stigmatised  as 
taking  after  Phinehas  (sou  of  Eli), 
14  ;  raised  to  the  pontificate  by 
Agrippa,  70  ;  his  adventure  on  the 
Day  of  Atonement,  410. 

Isidore  (Bp.  of  Seville)  —  respecting 
the  Epistle  to  Hebrews,  i.  293 ; 
anecdote  of  the  poisoned  chalice,  ii. 
150 ;  his  statement  as  to  the  age  of 
John  the  Divine,  176. 

Isopsejjhia,  or  eqi(i)n<meral  interpreta- 
tion, ii.  291.  [See  also  Gematria 
and  Kabbalali.) 


Jacob's  blessing,  circumstances  of, 
strangely  perverted  in  the  Vulgate, 
<S:c.,  i.  459. 

Jaddua,  the  last  historic  personage  of 
the  Old  Testament  narrative,  i.  253. 

James — his  relationship,  i.  483 — 509 ; 
the  home  at  Nazareth,  510  et  seq.; 
his  training,  513 — 516;  his  ac- 
quaintance with  the  Scriptures,  516; 
with  uncanouical  literature,  517  ; 
his  religious  status,  519,  521 ;  his 
early  opinions  of  Jesus  and  His 


mission,  523 — 526 ;  his  conversion 
to  Christianity,  529 ;  as  Bishop  of 
Jerusalem,  533;  presides  at  the 
Synod,  535  et  svq.  ;  his  part  in  the 
Gentile  controversy,  537  ;  decision 
respecting  proselytes,  539 ;  his  mar- 
tyrdom, 549,  554  ;  liabbinic 
legends,  555  et  seq.  ;  and  traditional 
details  from  Apocryphal  Gospels, 
ibid.,  note. 

James,  Epistle  of — "The  Gospel" 
never  mentioned,  i.  94 ;  his  in- 
debtedness to  Sermon  on  Mount, 
516 ;  and  to  jjost-biblical  literature, 
517;  authenticity  of  the  Epistle, 
ii.  1  et  seq. ;  date,  7 — 9 ;  historic 
surroundings,  10 — 14  ;  genius,  15 
et  seq. ;  style,  23  et  seq. ;  topical 
analysis,  24 — 26  ;  aim,  27  et  seq.  ; 
character,  29,  30 ;  the  valedictory 
expression  of  Hebrew  prophecy,  30, 
31 ;  literal  version, with  explanatory 
notes,  32  —  78;  faith  and  works, 
79,  89 — 92  ;  Abraham's  example, 
93  et  seq. ;  comparison  with  other 
Apostolic  writings,  97 — 100. 

Jeremiah — his  death  by  stoning,  re- 
ferred to,  i.  461. 

Jerusalem — "  the  centre  of  the  earth," 
a  Eabbinic  conceit,  i.  543 ;  fall  of, 
ii.  323—330;  ^Elia  Capitolina  built 
upon  its  ruins,  331 ;  its  fall  an 
epoch  in  history,  ii.  423  ;  Jerusalem 
and  Salem,  543 — 545. 

Jerusalem,  the  New,  ii.  321 ;  legendary 
detail,  ibid.,  note. 

Jesus  Christ  [see  Christ). 

Jesus  son  of  Ananus,  his  warning  cry 
and  tragic  fate,  i.  556. 

Jesus  son  of  Gamala,  same  as  Joshua 
ben  Gamala,  q.v. 

Jesus  son  of  Pandei-a,  a  disguised  re- 
ference to  Jtsus  CLaist  in  the  Tal- 
mud, i.  554. 

Jesus  son  of  Sirach — author  of  Eccle- 
siasticus,  a  work  well  known  to 
James,  i.  517  ;  the  book  prohibited 
by  the  Rabbis,  ibid. 

Jews — detested  by  Gaius  (Cahgula),  i. 
19;  Claudius  orders  their  expul- 
sion from  Home,  ibid.  ;  futility  of 
the  edict,  59 ;  not  involved  in  the 
Neronian  persecutions  and  mas- 
sacres, 61 ;  sworn  enemies  of  the 
Christians,  62 ;  proselytes  in  the 
Imjierial  Palace,  63  ;  promise  Nero 
the  kingdom  of  Jerusalem,  ibid. ; 
their  religion  privileged  at  Rome, 
64  ;  their  malice,  the  secret  of  the 


INDEX. 


591 


first  Christian  persecution,  ibid. ; 
patronized  by  Alexander  the  Great, 
253  ;  befriended  by  the  Ptolemies, 
254 ;  certain,  of  Alexandria,  burned 
alive,  461 ;  revolt  in  Judea,  ii.  198 
et  seq.  ;  its  spread  throughout 
Palestine,  204 ;  epidemic  of  mas- 
sacre, 205  et  stq. ;  Josephus's 
opinion  that  his  people  were  ripe 
for  destruction,  217,  267;  fall  of 
Jerusalem,  323,  328  ;  AUva  Capito- 
lina  built  upon  its  ruins,  331 ;  Jews 
denied  admission,  ibid.  ;  their  re- 
ligion abrogated,  ibid. 
Jochanan  ben  Napuchah  and  his  com- 
promise, i.  258. 
Jochanan  ben  Zaccai  foretells  the  de- 
struction of  the  Temple,  i.  435. 
John — one  of  the  thiee  Pillar- Apostles, 
ii.  104;  his  religious  majority  syn- 
chronous with  the  insurrection  in 
Galilee,  110;  a  key  to  his  impetuous 
spirit,  ibid. ;  and  patriotic  bias, 
111;  a  disciple  of  John  the  Baptist, 
112;  his  call  by  Jesus,  115;  his 
characteristics,  117;  ambitious  re- 
quest of  his  mother,  124 — 127  ;  his 
intimacy  with  Jesus,  128;  at  the 
cross,  130;  entrusted  with  the  care 
of  the  mother  of  Jesus,  131 ;  at  the 
sepulchre,  134;  with  "  the  eleven," 
ibid.;  revisits  Galilee,  135;  in  the 
Temple  at  Jerusalem,  137;  before 
the  Sanhedrin,  138;  saved  by  the 
interference  of  Gamaliel,  i.  139; 
scourged,  yet  persisting  in  preach- 
ing the  Word,  ibid.;  mentioned  once 
only  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  141 ; 
his  Judaic  sympathies,  142  et  seq.  ; 
absence  of  further  mention  in  Scrip- 
ture till  at  Patmos,  145;  his  exile, 
146  et  seq.;  his  work,  ibid,  and  155  ; 
the  Ajx)calypse  {q.v.)  of  prior  date 
to  his  Gospel  and  Epistles  (q.v.), 
ibid.  ;  legendary  anecdotes,  161 — 
178;  death  of  John,  510;  his  ex- 
treme old  age,  581. 
John,  Epistles  of,  the  last  utterance  of 

Divine  revelation,  i.  96. 
John,  First  Epistle — its  object  and  out- 
line, ii.  392;  contents,  396—398; 
structural  peculiarities,  399;  authen- 
ticity, 400  et  seq.  ;  topical  analysis, 
literal  version  and  comments,  400 
—478. 
John,  Second  Epistle— its  authenticity 
discus8(  d,  ii.  482  et  seq.  ;  Kyria,  to 
whom  addressed,  whether  an  ap- 
pellative or  a  proper  name,  485 — 


438,  492—494;  topical  analysis, 
literal  translation  and  notes,  495 — 
5J4. 
John,  Third  Epistle — Gains,  to  whom 
addressed,  ii.  505  ;  object  and  aim, 
506  ;  literal  translation  and  notes, 
507 — 509  ;  salutation,  509  et  seq. 
Josephus — inimical  to  the  Christians,  i. 
63 ;  a  renegade  Pharisee,  64 ;  his 
eulogy  of  the  abandoned  Poppaja, 
65;  date  of  his  writings,  190; 
verbal  resemblances  to  Peter's 
Second  Epistle,  191;  his  use  of 
Idahhinic  I£//ffadoth,  192;  re-writes 
"Jewish  History"  for  Roman 
readers,  264;  his  "Jewish  War" 
originally  in  Aramaic,  341;  the 
untrustworthiness  of  his  writings, 
557  ;  his  impeachment  of  the  priest- 
hood, ii.  70 ;  acts  as  Governor  of 
Gamala,  207  ;  his  military  services, 
208;  his  character,  210;  his  treat- 
ment of  Daniel's  propliucy  affecting 
Rome,  236. 
Joshua  ben  Gamala  accpiires  the  High 
Priesthood  by  purchase,  i.  551 — ii. 
14;  massacred  by  his  co-religionists, 
ii.  211,  276. 
Judah  the  Holy— the  compiler  of  the 
Mishnah,  i.  5 1 1  ;  biographical  anec- 
dotes from  the  Talmud,  215,  ii. 
173. 
JudaisQi — a  religio  licita  at  Rome,  i. 
61;  friends  at  court,  62;  inimical 
to  Christianity,  63;  as  understood 
by  Philo*  Jud;eas,  305 ;  its  spirit 
re-animated  by  secular  inspiration, 
315 ;  its  qi(f/si  deification  of  the 
priesthood,  326  et  seq. ;  abrogated, 
ii.  331 ;  its  developments,  MO  et  seq. 
Judas  of  Galilee — his  insurreitiou,   ii. 

110. 
Jude,  Epistle  of — work  of  a  non- 
apostolic  writer,  i.  93,  222 ;  freely 
utilises  Jewish  J£u ff ado th,  and  Apo- 
cryphal literature,  ibid.;  compared 
with  Second  Epistle  of  Peter,  196 — 
200 ;  its  evident  priority  thereto, 
201—220  ;  story  of  the  Desposyni, 
his  grandsons,  221  ;  their  adven- 
ture with  Domitiau,  222;  family 
connexions  of  Jude,  223 — 226  ; 
compared  with  Paul,  229  et  seq. ; 
literal  veision  and  commentary, 
230—235;  style  considered,  236; 
structural  peculiarity,  237 ;  allu- 
sions to  secular  literature,  238 — 
241  ;  its  aim  and  object,  242  et  seq. 
J  ustin  Martyr — his  mistake  concerning 


592 


INDEX. 


Simon  Map;us,  i.  115,  ii.  346;  his 
charf^^c  against  tho  Jews  for  tam- 
peririi,'  with  the  LXX.,  i.  2!il ;  his 
statement  as  to  cuircnt  Jewish 
belief,  ii.  83,  and  respecting  Anti- 
christ, 230. 


Kabbalah — a  species  of  Rabbinic  exe- 
gesis, i.  281,  ii.  220,  347.  {f>'ee  also 
Gematria  and  Ifopsiphia.) 

Kapparah — the  substitutionarj'  sacri- 
fice of  modern  Jews,  i.  435  et  scq. 

Kedar— tents  of,  and  the  scattered 
nation,  i.  153. 

Kenites — their  i)art  in  the  Temple  ser- 
vices, i.  521,  553. 

Kephas-yMiy  at  Corinth,  i.  88.  [See 
also  s.v.  Peter.) 

Keren  Happuk,  represented  by  Amal- 
thea's  Ilorn  in  the  LXX.,  i.  259. 

King — a  provincial  title  of  the  Em- 
perors of  liome,  i.  1(33;  repugnant 
to  tho  Ivonians,  ii.  22G. 

Kitzur  Sh'lh — a  KabLalistic  epitome, 
quoted,  i.  311,  302,  ii.  102. 

Knowledge  and  Wisdom  compared 
and  contrasted,  ii.  58. 

Koheleth  (Midrash)  and  the  story  of 
Moses'  terror  at  Sinai,  i.  466. 

Korah — the  way  of,  i.  237  ;  reproached 
by  IMoses,  374. 

Kyria  in  Second  Epistle  of  John, 
whether  an  appellative  or  a  proper 
name,  considered,  ii.  485 — 487,  492 
—494. 


L. 


Laodicea,  ecclesiastical  council,  i. 
179,  ii.  179. 

La  Scala,  the  traditional  retreat  of 
John  at  Patmos,  ii.  158. 

Last  words  (chronoloiiically)  of  the 
New  Testament,  ii.  182. 

Latest  histoi  ic  name  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Scriptures,  i.  253. 

Law  of  IMoses — as  regarded  by  Peter 
and  by  James,  i.  94  :  its  delivery  at 
8inai,  466 ;  Rabbinic  legends  al- 
luded to  in  Hebrews  and  Acts, 
ibid. ;  further  detail  from  tho  Tal- 
mud, 468;  its  supersession,  469  ct 
seq. 

Legendary  traces  in  the  Septuagint 
Version,  i.  259. 


Lex  Papia  Poppa^a  and  its  connexion 
with  Roman  morals,  i.  7. 

Liturgy — Scriptural  use  of  the  word, 
i.  414;  its  classic  meaning,  ibid. 

Locusta  the  poisoner  a  paid  agent  of 
Kero,  i.  23  ;  her  part  in  the  murder 
of  Claudius,  33. 

Luther — on  the  authontieity  of  the 
Epistles,  i.  99;  as  to  authorship  of 
Hebrews,  291,  338;  endorses  tho 
Jewish  opinion  concerning  Mel- 
chizedek,  399 ;  upon  James,  ii.  4  ct 
seq.  ;  on  Justification  by  Works,  90 
et  seq.  ;  misquotes  Romans  (iii.  28), 
99  ;  on  the  Apocalypse.  224. 

Lysias,  his  timely  interference  on  be- 
half of  Paul,  i".  20. 


M. 


Maccabees,  Books  of,  referred  to  in 
Hebrews,  ii.  64. 

Maimonides — his  Moreh  Nevochim, 
quoted,  i.  535 ;  the  Yad  Hacha- 
zakah,  ii.  551. 

Maranatha  explained,  ii.  222. 

Mareion  the  Gnostic  and  Polycarp,  ii. 
164,  500. 

Marcionism  a  perversion  of  Paul's 
teaching,  i.  90. 

Marcus,  the  first  Gentile  Bishop  of 
Jerusalem,  i.  541. 

Marcus  Aurclius — his  view  of  Chris- 
tianity, i.  160 ;  his  writings  re- 
ferred to,  ii.  16. 

Maria  del  Popolo,  the  church  of.  its 
superstitious  connexion  with  Nero, 
i.  71. 

Maries,  the  three,  at  the  Cross,  ii.  131. 

Mark,  the  Evangelist — referred  to  by 
Peter,  i.  112;  his  indebtedness  to 
Peter,  127;  intimate  with  Paul, 
131 ;  interpreter  to  Peter  at  Rome, 
ii.  21 ;  accredited  with  authorship 
of  Apocalypse,  152,  and  with  the 
founding  of  the  School  at  Alexan- 
dria, i.  279. 

Marriage — regarded  with  disfa\'our  at 
Rome,  i.  7  ;  extroiue  views,  1 1  ; 
honoured  and  consecrated  by  Chris- 
tianity, 107,  295;  disjiaragcd  by 
the  Essenos  (a  Jewish  sect),  470; 
the  Apostles  married,  ii.  114,  175. 

Martineau's  "Hours  of  Thought,' 
((uoted.  i.  16. 

Martyrdom,  era  of,  marked  by  tho 
Apocalypse,  ii.  190. 


INDEX. 


593 


Mary,  the  hostess  of  the  Apostles  at 
Jerusalem,  i.  532. 

Matthew — his  mission  and  martyrdom, 
i.  85. 

Melancthon  concerning  Hebrews  and 
Paul,  i.  294. 

Molchizedek — his  priesthood,  i.  370  et 
seq.  ;  historical  account  confined  to 
two  verses  of  Genesis,  393 ;  tra- 
ditional details  from  the  Midrash, 

396  ;  as  regarded  by  Philo  Juda.'us, 

397  ;  of  unknown  parentage,  ibid.  ; 
attempted  identifications,  398  et 
seq. ;  regarded  as  a  type,  399  et 
seq.  ;  his  humanity,  403  ;  his  rela- 
tive greatness,  404 ;  his  priesthood 
superior  to  that  of  the  Levites, 
407,  but  inferior  to  that  of  Christ, 
408. 

Messalina,  wife  of  Claudius,  i.  23 ; 
mother  of  Britannicus  and  Octavia, 

26  ;  her  attempts  ujDon  Nero's  life, 

27  ;  her  wretched  end,  ilml. 
Messiah  greater  than  the  Patriarchs, 

etc.,  i.  347. 
Messiahs,  the  false,  ii.  198,  331. 
Metatron — a  Rabbinic  anticipation  of 

Messiah,  i.  398,  400,  555. 
Michael  and  the  body  of  Moses,  L  199, 

214,  232,  238  et  seq. 
Midrash  Koheleth — a  comment  on  Ec- 

clesiastes,  i.  466,  555. 
Milton's  "  Paradise  Lost " — quoted,  ii. 

470. 
Minim — the  appellative  of  Christians 

in     the     Talmud     and     Rabbinic 

writings,  i.  554. 
Ministering    Angels — their    office    at 

Sinai,  i.  468. 
Montanists  and  post-baptismal  sins,  i. 

466. 
Montanus,  the  nominal  founder  of  an 

early  Christian   sect,  i.  287.     {See 

Montanists.) 
Moreh    Nevochim — a   work   of    Mai- 

monides,  i.  535. 
Moses — legend   of  his  death,  i.   232 ; 

an    apocryphal   work   entitled  the 

"  Ascension  of  Moses,"  quoted  by 

Jude,  238;  as  the  good  shepherd, 

an  anecdote  from  the  Midrash,  ii. 

173. 
Motto  of  the  Alexandrian  School,  i. 

280. 

N. 

Nazarencs — a  Juda?o-Christian  sect,  ii. 
342. 

m  m 


Nero -son  of  Agrippina  and  Aheno- 
barbus,  i.  23  ;  his  parents  banished, 
25  ;  and  he  consigned  to  care  of  his 
aunt  Domitia,  ibid.;  his  bad  train- 
ing, 26;  his  life  unsuccessfully 
attempted  by  the  Empress  Mes- 
salina, iij(f.;  who  shortly  afterwards 
is  assassinated,  27;  his  mother  then 
marries  the  Emperor  her  uncle,  ibid.: 
whose  daughter  is  betrothed  to 
Nero,  28  ;  the  ambitious  intrigues 
of  his  mother,  31 ;  she  poisons  her 
husband,  33  ;  and  places  Nero  upon 
the  throne,  34  ;  under  the  tutelage 
of  Burrus  and  Seneca  the  earlier 
part  of  his  reign  is  favourable,  37  ; 
their  reprehensible  laxity  permits 
a  liaison  of  the  youthful  Nero  with 
Acte,  a  Grecian  odalisque,  38  ; 
he  quarrels  with  Agrippina,  39  : 
poisons  his  brother-in-law,  the 
rightful  heir  to  the  throne,  41 ; 
contracts  a  mesalliance  with  Poppaea 
Sabina,  the  wife  of  a  boon  com- 
panion, 42 ;  who  prompted  his 
worst  crimes,  including  the  murder 
of  his  mother,  43,  47  ;  and  eventu- 
ally met  her  own  death  from  a  kick 
by  Nero,  49 ;  suspected  of  the 
burning  of  Rome,  51 ;  but  he 
charges  the  incendiarism  upon  the 
Christians,  58,  59  ;  and  mercilessly 
persecutes  them,  67  et  seq. ;  with 
cruel  EBstheticism,  69 ;  making 
them  to  act  as  the  tableaux  vivants 
of  his  realistic  plays,  70;  justly 
regarded  as  the  Antichrist,  71 ; 
saluted  as  "  the  Saviour  of  the 
WORLD,"  72;  the  Romans  revolt, 
73,  74  ;  he  ignominiously  flees  the 
city,  75 ;  and  commits  suicide, 
77. 

Neropolis — its  connexion  with  the  re- 
building of  Rome,  i.  52. 

New  Year's  Day  among  Jews,  and  its 
solemnities,  i.  431  ct  seq. 

Nicene  Creed — misread  in  the  churches, 
i.  351. 

Nicodemus,  Gospel  of — quoted  or  al- 
luded to,  i.  139,  ii.  274. 

Nicolas  the  deacon,  ii.  167. 

Nicolaitans— incur  the  indignation  of 
John,  i.  242 ;  their  origin  and 
development,  243 ;  the  error  of 
Irenajus  as  to  their  founder,  ii. 
167,  244. 

Nishmath  Chajim — quoted  for  a  re- 
markable Messianic  inference,  i. 
356.. 


594 


INDEX. 


O. 


Octavia — daughtor  of  Claudius,  i.  26  ; 
married  to  Nero,  29  ;  jjroscnt  when 
Nero  poisoned  her  l>rother,  41  ; 
banished  to  Pandataria,  49  ;  assas- 
pinated  by  order  of  her  husband, 
ibid. 

<  )nia8'  Temple  at  Leontopolis — thought 
by  some  to  be  the  " Temple" 
referred  to  in  Hebrews,  i.  332,  409. 

Origen — the  greatest  of  the  Christian 
Fathers,  i.  280;  his  peculiar  exe- 
gesis, 282  et  seq. ;  his  opinion  con- 
cerning Hebrews,  289 ;  Epistle  of 
James,  ii.  1 ;  his  account  of  the 
banishment  of  John,  18G,  and 
Peter's  crucifixion,  513. 


Pactus  Thrasea,  a  noble  Stoic,  i.  14 ; 
put  to  death  by  order  of  Nero,  49  ; 
his  character  sketched  by  Tacitus, 
ii.  434. 

Paganism — its  decadence,  i.  13. 

Pantheon  at  Rome,  i.  19. 

Papyru.s — the  paj^r  of  John's  Epistle, 
ii.  497. 

Paraclete — its  occurrence  in  Rabbinic 
writings,  ii.  52 ;  its  classic  sense 
and  Patristic  use,  410. 

Paradise — its  symbolic  application  by 
the  Rabbis,  i.  281  et  seq. 

P.irashah  and  Haphtarah,  as  read  in 
Apostolic  times,  identified,  i.  256. 

Parousia,  the,  of  early  Christian  antici- 
pation, i.  193. 

Pascal — noteworthy  saying  of,  quoted, 
ii.  44. 

Patmos — the  exile  homo  of  John,  ii. 
159  et  seq. 

Patristic  views  as  to  authorship  of 
Hebrews,  ii.  528 — 541. 

Paul — humanely  treated  by  the  polit- 
archs  of  Thcssalonica,  i.  20 ;  pro- 
tected from  the  Jews  at  Corinth  by 
Gallio,  brother  of  Seneca,  ibid.  ; 
delivered  from  the  plots  of  the 
Sanhedrin  at  Jerusalem  by  Lysias 
and  Festus,  ibid. ;  his  appeal  to 
Cassar,  his  residence  in  Rome,  21 ; 
indications  of  Alexandrianism  in 
his  Epistles,  91. 

Pella— the  refuge  of  tho  early  Chris- 
tians, ii.  148  ;  its  geographical 
position,  193;  massacre  of  Jews  at, 
204  ;  its  present  identification,  280. 


Penates,  or  household  gods,  i.  28. 

Peregriniis,  death  of — a  tract  by 
Lucian  illustrative  of  the  Neronian 
persecutions,  i.  469  et  seq. 

Peter — short  sketch  of  his  history,  i. 
109 — 111  ;  autobiographic  touches 
in  his  Epistles,  111  et  seq. ;  his 
daughtor  Petronilla,  112  ;  his  wife's 
martyrdom,  114 ;  further  details 
from  tradition,  114 — 116  ;  his  con- 
nexion with  Rome,  117,  ii.  512 
—  514;  his  crucifixion,  i.  118,  119; 
his  primacy  considered,  ii.  511  et 
seq. 

Peter,  First  Epistle  of — approximate 
date,  i.  121;  characteristic  features, 
122  et  seq.  ;  Gospel  reminiscences, 
125—128;  influence  of  Paul  and 
James,  129 — 132  ;  originality  of  the 
author,  132;  subject-matter,  133 — 
138  ;  Gospel  to  the  dead,  139—143 ; 
conciliatory  tone  of  the  Epistle, 
143 — 146  ;  historical  circumstances, 
147  et  seq.  ;  key-note  of  its  teach- 
ing, 149;  to  whom  addressed,  151 
et  seq. ;  acquaintance  with  Book  of 
Daniel,  154;  topical  analysis,  156 
— 170  ;  acquaintance  with  Book  of 
Proverbs,  171  ;  closing  admoni- 
tions, 172;  salutation,  173. 

Peter,  Second  Epistle  of  —  its  dis- 
tinguishing peculiarities,  174 ;  can- 
onicity,  175  et  seq.;  external  evi- 
dence as  to  authenticity,  177  et  seq.  ; 
Patristic  testimony,  179,  180;  out- 
line of  contents,  183;  singularities 
of  style  and  expression,  184 — 190; 
points  of  similarity  to  Josephus, 
190—192;  contrasts,  193  et  seq.; 
coincidences  with  Jude,  197 — 202  ; 
authenticity  discussed,  203  et  seq. ; 
internal  evidence,  204  ;  date,  205 ; 
superiority  to  other  contemporary 
writings,  206 ;  summing  up  of 
evidence,  207  et  seq. ;  new  transla- 
tion, with  running  comment,  210 — 
218. 

Petronilla,  a  daughter  of  Peter,  i.  112. 

Philemon,  probable  date  of  Epistle  to, 
i.  11. 

Philo  Judajus — the  most  celebrated  of 
the  Alexandrian  writers,  i.  264 ; 
his  ignorance  of  tho  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures, ibid.  ;  his  views  and  opinions, 
265  ;  his  pri(\stly  origin  and  family 
connexions,  266  ;  his  wife  and  her 
noteworthy  saying,  267  ;  his  visit 
to  Jerusalem,  and  his  political  ser 
vices,  ibid. ;  not  a  Christian,  as  tn- 


INDEX. 


59o 


ditionally  reported,  2G8,  but  helped 
to  pave  the  way  lor  Christianity  by 
his  literary  labours,  ibid.;  his  pecu- 
liar exegesis  of  Holy  Writ,  269 ; 
his  influence  on  Apostolic  writings, 
273 — 276  ;  his  philosophy  embodied 
in  the  Alexandrian  School  {see  s.v. 
Alexandria),  277  ;  its  part  in  the 
development  of  Revelation,  278  e( 
seq.  ;  his  influence  on  the  writer  of 
Hebrews,  307 — 310;  specimens  of 
Philonian  allegory,  ii.  524 — 526  ; 
Philo's  views  about  the  Logos, 
526 — 528  ;  coincidences  between 
the  works  of  Philo  and  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  541 — 543. 

Phinehas,  the  seventh  from  Jacob,  i. 
234. 

Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eli — referred  to, 
ii.  14. 

Phoenix  accredited  by  Tacitus,  the 
Roman  historian,  i.  103,  and  used 
illustratively  by  Clemens,  ihid. 

Phylacteries — their  exalted  sanction, 
li.  341. 

Pilate — the  story  of  a  letter  to  Tibe- 
rius concerning  "the  Crucifixion," 
i.  19. 

Pilgrimage  feasts  of  Judaism — Hillel's 
decision  respecting,  i.  514;  taken 
occasion  of  for  revisiting  Jerusa- 
lem, 533. 

Pirke  Rabbi  Eliezer  on  the  death  of 
Isaac,  i.  458. 

Plato — a  notable  example  of  ethnic 
inspiration,  i.  286  :  his  influence  on 
Philo  Judseus,  287,  and  indirectly 
on  Christianit}',  ihid.  ;  his  works 
quoted  or  alluded  to,  i.  187,  315  ; 
ii.  60. 

Plautus'  "Epedicus" — quoted,  ii.  53. 

Pliny— letter  to  Trajan,  i.  121,  153; 
his  views  of  Christianity,  160. 

Pompeii — its  relics,  i.  2  ;  its  sarcastic 
graffiti,  148. 

Pomponia  Gra3cina — her  possible  con- 
nexion with  Christianity,  i.  58. 

Pompey's  desecratidnof  the  Teniple  at 
Jerusalem,  i.  416. 

Popprea  Sabina,  wife  of  Marcus  Otho 
— transferred  to  Nero,  i.  43  ;  her 
baneful  influence,  49  ;  a  proselyte 
to  Judaism,  63  ;  possibly  connected 
with  the  persecution  of  the  Chris- 
tians, 64  ;  eulogised  by  Josephus, 
though  Tucitus  and  Suetonius  are 
unable  to  praise  her,  65  ;  premature 
death  from  a  kick  by  her  husband, 
49. 

m  m  2 


Post-baptismal  sins,  i.  383. 
Prayer — efficacy  of,  ii.  75. 
Praj'er-Book — its  acknowledgment  of 

Paul  as  the  writer  of  Hebrews,  i. 

294  et  seq. 
Primacy  of  Peter  cunsidered,   ii.   511 

et  seq. 
Prodigality  of   Imperial  Rome,    i.    5, 

165. 
Proselytes  at  the  Court  of  Nero,  i   62 ; 

inimical  to  Christianity,  64  ;  inju- 
rious to  Israel,  ii.  199. 
Proverbs,  Book  of — familiar  to  Peter, 

i.  165,  171. 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus  and  the  Septua- 

gint,  i.   254  et  seq. 
Pudens,  a  senator  of  Rome,  i.  113. 
Punishment— its    disciplinary   aim,    i. 

170. 
Pythagorean  mysteries,  i.  272. 


Q. 


Quadratus  and  his  reminiscences  of 
John  the  Divine,  ii.  175. 

Quartodecimans — -observers  of  the  14th 
Nisan  as  Easter,  ii.  155. 

Quirinus  (Cyrenius)  and  the  insurrec- 
tion in  Galilee,  ii.  110. 

Quotations  from  Greek  poets  in  the 
New  Testament,  i.  241 ;  from  Rab- 
binical writings  {see  s.v.  Talmud, 
Midrashim,  &c.). 


R. 


Rabbinic  account  of  the  pattern  of  the 
Tabernacle,  i.  316  et  seq. 

Rabbinism  defined  and  estimated,  ii. 
109. 

Eaca — its  interpretation  and  use,  ii. 
54,  81. 

Ransom— mistaken  notion  of  the  eirly 
Church,  i.  325,  423. 

Rechabites  in  the  Temple  service,  i. 
521,  553. 

Redemption — the  views  of  Peter  and 
Paul  compared,  i.  132—136. 

Renan — on  the  burning  of  Rome,  i. 
52  ;  on  the  authenticity  of  I.  Peter, 
i.  122;  II.  Peter,  174. 

Repentance — the  first  ^n^earUestleBBon 
of  the  Gospel,  i.  376;  its  import- 
ance, ii.  77. 

Itesh  Gaiatha,  "Head  of  the  Cap- 
tivity," ii.  10,  11. 


596 


INDEX. 


Righteousness — defined  hy  Paul,  i. 
321  ;  by  Apollos,  ibid. 

Rol)osi)icvi(''s  housekcoi)cr — a  Nero- 
uiaii  parallel  to,  i.  77. 

Rich  and  poor  providentially  tested, 
ii.43. 

Romans,  Epistle  to — its  date,  &c., 
ii.  8. 

Rome — its  abnormal  df  pravity,  i.  1  ct 
seq.  ;  its  wealth,  prodigality,  &c., 
2 ;  preponderance  of  its  blave  popu- 
lation, 3  ;  its  family  life,  7  ;  litera- 
ture and  art,  8  ;  public  amusements, 
9;  its  Senate,  &c.,  10  et  seq.;  its 
moribund  religion,  12  et  seq.;  its 
contact  with  Christianity,  19;  its 
golden  qiii»quenniuin,  37  ;  the  burn- 
ing of,  51 — 57  ;  St.  Peter's  con- 
nexion with,  in  et  seq. ;  forecasts  of 
its  downfdll,  ii.  220;  famine  at,  2i2  ; 
pestilence,  254 ;  Rabbinic  legend 
of  the  founding  of ,  282  ;  burning  of 
the  temple  of  Jupiter,  320 ;  its 
overthrow  as  regarded  by  Esdras, 
ibid.  ;  Patristic  evidence  respecting 
Peter's  visit,  512—514. 

Rubellius  Plautus — his  assassination 
by  Nero,  i.  22. 


S. 


Sabbath  of  Sabbatism,  i.  431. 

Sakya  Mouni  (Buddha) — his  mission, 

i.  287. 
Salem  and  Jerusalem,  ii.  543 — 545. 
Salome — her  ambitious  request,  ii.  124 

et  seq. 
Sammaei,  the  Angel  of  Death,  i.  361. 
Sanhednn  of  Jerusalem — its  conspiracy 

against  Paul,  i.  20  ;  its  libel  of  the 

Christians,  62. 
Satan — once  regarded  as  the  recipient 

of  the  world's  ransom,  i.  325,  423  ; 

Rabbinic  conceit  as  to  the  abeyance 

of  his  prerogative  on  the  Day  of 

Atonement,  432. 
Saturnalia  of  Rome,  i.  39. 
Sectarianism  and  its  developments,  ii. 

Wi  et  seq. 
Seneca — -made  co-tutor  with  Burrus  of 

the   youthful  Nero,  i.   29  ;  his  be- 
nign influence  over  his  pupil,  37  ; 

his  untimely  end,  49  ;  his  o^jiuions 

quoted,  ii.  434. 
Sepher    lia    Chayim  —  a    Rabbinical 

treatise  on  eschatology,  quoted,  ii. 

74. 
Septuagint  version  of  Old  Testament — 


nndnrtal^en  at  instance  of  Ptolemy 
I'hiiadelplius,  i.  254  ;  its  bearing 
upon  the  Gentile  world,  255  ;  upon 
Jews  and  Judaism,  256  ;  the  anni- 
v^r^ary  of  its  publication  kept  as  a 
festival  by  the  Alexandriaus,  256  ; 
as  a  fast  by  Palestinian  Jews,  257  ; 
Justin  Martyr's  complaint  respect- 
ing, ibid.  ;  its  mistranslation,  25!) 
et  seq.  ;  its  local  bias,  261  ;  regarded 
by  some  as  an  inspired  translation, 
ii.  167. 

Sermon  on  the  Mount — compared  with 
James's  Epistle,  i.  517,  ii.  19,  41. 

Shabbath  Shabbathou — an  appellative 
of  the  Day  of  Atonement,  i.  431. 

Shakespeare — Timon  of  Athens  (iii.  6) 
quoted,  ii.  439 ;  Ant.  and  Cleop. 
(ii.  1)  quoted,  468. 

Shechiuafi — the  sole  prerogative  of 
Israel,  i.  362 ;  a  Jewish  name  for 
the  Messiah,  ii.  50. 

Shema  Israel — the  keynote  of  Judaism, 
ii.  54,  83. 

Shemoth  Rabba — a  Jewish  com- 
mentary, quoted,  ii.  43. 

Shcshach — a  Scriptural  pseudonym  for 
Babel,  ii.  297. 

Sibylline  Oracles — their  use  at  Rome, 
i.  61  ;  their  forecast  of  the  down- 
fdll of  Rome,  ii.  219  et  seq.;  their 
illustration  of  the  Apocalypse,  269, 
516. 

Silas  or  Silvanus — his  claims  as  a  New 
Testament  author,  i.  333. 

Silaiiian  law,  i.  11. 

Simeon  of  Mizpeh — one  of  the  earliest 
writers  of  the  Talmud,  i.  433. 

Simon  Magus— the  legend  of  his  con- 
test with  Peter,  i.  115. 

Simon  son  of  Giora  —  a  renowned 
leader  in  the  Jewish  war,  ii.  205, 
211,  214  et  seq. 

Simon  son  of  Onias,  the  model  High 
Priest,  ii.  549  et  seq. 

Simony  of  the  priesthood,  ii.  14. 

Simon  Zelotes — his  death  by  cruci- 
fi.\ion,  i.  86. 

Sirach,  the  son  of — his  literary  in- 
lluence  on  the  Epistle  of  James^  ii. 
20. 

Slavery — its  prevalence  at  Rome,  i.  3  ; 
Jews  rarely  enslaved,  and  why,  163. 

Socrates,  the  Athenian  philosopher — 
his  inspiration,  i.  287. 

Socrates  the  historian  —  his  charge 
against  the  Nestorian  sect,  ii.  449 
et  seq. 

Solfatara — its     suggestive    connexion 


INDEX. 


)97 


•with  "  the  land  for  burning "  of 
Hebrews  vi.  8,  i.  389,  ii.  266. 

Solomon,  the  wisdom  of,  i.  263. 

Stoicism— its  pnn'aleiiue  in  Apostolic 
times,  i.  14  ;  its  premium  on  suicide, 
ibid.;  its  decadence,  16;  compared 
■with  Chi-istiauity,  i/iid.  {See  also 
Cato,  Clennthes,  Si^neca,  and  Zeno.) 

Stoning  of  Jeremiah,  i.  461. 

Suetonius — his  idea  of  Christianity,  i. 
160,  ii.  200. 

Suicide,  the  panacea  of  Stoicism,  i.  14  ; 
its  frequency,  ibid.  ;  its  varied 
nomenclature,  15. 


T. 


Tabernacle — its  Divine  original,  i.  316  ; 
reference  thereto  (and  not  to  the 
Temple)  by  the  author  of  Hebrews, 
418. 

Tableaux  vivants  oi  Roman  plays,  i.  70. 

Tables  of  the  Law — their  traditional 
size  and  weight,  i.  418. 

Tacitus — his  account  of  the  Roman 
senate,  i.  10;  of  Nero,  48;  hia 
view  of  Christianity,  147  et  scq., 
160;  his  description  of  the  Jews 
of  his  time,  ii.  199. 

Talmud  of  Babylon — a  compend  of  the 
traditions  of  the  elders  (Matt.  xv. 
2),  its  subject-matter,  i.  511  et  seq.  ; 
its  compiler,  ibid.  {See  Index  of 
Quotations,  etc.) 

Tanchuma,  Midrash — a  Jewish  com- 
ment, quoted,  i.  366 — ii.  37,  327. 

Targums  or  Chaldee  Paraphrases  of 
the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  cited 
or  alluded  to,  i.  114,  232,  262,  353, 
358,  374,  378,  394,  399,  417,  418, 
449,  460,  465;  ii.  257,  258,  523, 
543,  544. 

Tartarus— a  classic  term  made  use  of 
by  Peter,  i.  185,  214. 

Te  Deums  straugely  associated  with 
autos  da  fi',  ii.  58. 

Temple  of  Oniasat  Leontopolis,  a  fac- 
simile of  the  Judajan  temple,  i.  331 
et  seq.,  409. 

Ten  Tribes  of  Israel  never  to  be  re- 
stored to  Palestine,  ii.  34. 

TertuUian — concerning  Nero  and  the 
persecution  of  the  Christians,  i.  67, 
121,  147;  his  mention  of  Jude  the 
earliest  on  record,  220;  accredits 
Bxrnabas  with  writing  "  Hebrews," 
333  ;  his  pronounced  views  on  celi- 
bacy, ii.  114. 


Testament  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs, 
quoted  or  referred  to,  i.  322,  ii.  39, 
64,  155,  343,  422,  518,  519. 

Tetragrammaton,  the  ineffable  name 
Jti/ioPdh,  i.  436. 

Theodore  of  Mopsuestia — his  rejection 
of  the  Petrine  Epistles,  i.  122,  179  ; 
ignores  the  Apocalypse,  ii.  180; 
unfavourable  to  John's  Epistles, 
483. 

Thomas  the  Apostle  of  India,  i.  86. 

Tiberius  Ctesar — his  character  skctchf  d 
by  Suetonius,  i.  19  ;  the  tragic  end 
of  his  family,  22. 

Tiberius  Procurator  of  Palestine — his 
relation  to  Philo,  i.  63 :  made 
Prasfect  of  Alexandria,  ii.  205  ;  an 
apostate  Jew,  ibid. 

Tilliii,  Midrash,  a  Rabbinic  commen- 
tary on  Psalms,  i.  357,  361. 

Titus — his  acquaintance  with  Nero,  i. 
41 ;  the  conqueror  of  Jadfea,  ii.  310  ; 
his  grant  of  land  to  Josephus  the 
historian,  323;  blockades  Jeru- 
salem, 325;  anxious  to  preserve 
the  Temple,  326  ;  his  purpose  to 
destroy  Christianity  with  Judaism, 
ibid.;  the  destruction  of  the  city, 
327 ;  Josephus  eulogises  him,  but 
the  Talmudists  brand  his  name 
with  infamy,  ibid.,  note. 


U. 


Unity   of    God — its   pre-eminence    in 

Judaism,  ii.  54,  83  ;  not  uniformity, 

i.  249. 
Unpardonable   sins   from   a   Rabbinic 

point  of  view,  ii.  472. 
Unstrung  bow,  a  forcible  metaphor,  ii. 

172. 
Uxoriousness  of  the  Roman  Emperors, 

i.  22. 


Vehmgericht,  the,  referred  to,  ii.  198. 

Veil  of  the  Temple — its  material, 
dimensions,  &c.,  i.  415. 

Vespasian — his  miracles,  ii.  311  ;  his 
history  elucidative  of  revelation, 
312—315. 

Victorinus  of  Pettau — his  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Apocalypse,  ii.  259. 

Vine,  the  —  an  early  ecclesiastical 
legend,  ii.  165. 

Virgin  ]\Iary — her  tomb  at  Ephesus, 
ii.  133. 


598 


INDEX. 


Visitation  of  the  sick  (Church  Service), 

referred  to,  i.  294,  ii.  75, 
Vulgate  version,  i.  4-39, 

W, 

Wills  unknown  to  the  Jews,  borrowed 
from  Roman  usage,  i.  426. 

Wisdom,  Book  of — ils  Alexandrian 
origin,  i.  263;  coincidences  with 
the  I'auline  Epistles,  2S8  et  seq.  ; 
references,  &c.,  tabulated  (vet  Index 
of  (iuotations). 

World  —  condition  of,  in  Apostolic 
times,  i.  I  et  seq.  ;  compared  with 
the  Church,  106  et  seq.;  state  when 
Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  ii.  216 
et  seq. 

X. 

Xenophon,  the  physician  of  Claudius, 

i.  33. 
Xenopbon's  Memorabilia,  ii.  39, 


Yad  llachazakah,  a  digest  of  the  Tal- 
mud, quoted,  ii.  551.  i 


Yalkut  Chadash,  a  Rabbinic  miscel- 
lany, quoted,  i.  347,  4.';9. 

Yalkut  Shitnoni,  a  Rabldnic  miscel- 
lany, quoted,  i.  347,  ii.  74,  321. 


Z. 


Zabilia  or  Zebi  de( — his  soeinl  status, 
ii.  107  et  seq.  ;  his  death,  114. 

Zachariah  the  sou  of  Baruch — his 
massacre,  ii.  211. 

Zealots,  a  political  faction,  the  "  Home- 
Rulers"  of  Jewry,  ii.  62,  71,  203, 
253. 

Zechariah,  the  son  of  Berachiah  — the 
reference  in  Matthew  to.  probably 
an  erroneous  gloss,  ii.  22  ;  his 
murder,  ii.  274. 

Zeno,  the  Sloic  philosopher,  rcferreil 
to,  i.  14. 

Zeruhbabel,  Temple  of,  i.  416. 

Zohar,  a  noted  KaVjbalisfic  work,  re- 
ferred to,  i.  466,   ii.  114,  437. 

Zuk — the  destination  of  the  scapegoat, 
i.  435. 


PASSAGES     OF     SCRIPTURE 

QUOTED     OR     REFERRED     TO. 


Genesis, 

Genesi.s  (co 

idinued). 

Exodus  (continiied). 

i.  l.Vol. 

I.,  p.  276 

xl.    8,  Vol. 

I.,  p.  213 

xxu.  22-24,Vol.II.,p.41 

2 

455 

xli.  12 

213 

xxiii.    7        „ 

92 

6 

217 

1-^,  16  „ 

213 

20 

1.231 

14 

II.    3i) 

xlvil,    9        ,, 

146,458 

33 

428 

ii.  17 

1.376 

31 

459 

xxiv.    3-7     ,, 

428 

iil 

II.  525 

xlviii.    2        ,, 

4.')9 

5 

4J0 

iii.    5        , 

I.  216 

14,17-20,,      459 

6-8    ,, 

154 

18 

3S8 

xlix.    1 

157 

7 

430 

iv.    4 

260, 456 

10        „ 

259 

« 

164,  47t. 

7 

II.  523 

19 

•158 

9-11  ,, 

261 

8-10  „ 

i.  456 

1.  24 

160 

10 

261 

10 

456, 467 

26 

459 

XXV.    8        ,, 

261 

, 

II.    67, 

255 

16-21  „ 

417 

V.  24 
vi.    2 

1.456 

20(», 

214 

Exodus. 

31-37  „ 
40        „ 

414 
411 

3 

II,    65 

ii.    l.Vol. 

I.  p.  259 

sxvi.    6        „ 

442 

3-5    „ 

64 

11 

460 

31-35  ,, 

379,  415 

6 

1.261 

iii.    1 

261 

36,37  „ 

415 

8 

163 

5 

212 

xxviii.    1        ,, 

374 

9 

45'> 

6 

466 

36 

II.  155 

vii  11 

217 

14 

II.    47 

xxix.    4        „ 

1.423 

24 

XL  268 

iv.    6 

1.259 

9 

409 

xiv.  18,19  „ 

1.393 

22 

466 

16 

428 

XV.    6        „ 

453 

24 

261 

21 

447 

,, 

II.    54, 

93 

V,    2 

274 

36 

350 

9 

526 

vi.  12,15  ., 

259 

38-42  „ 

408 

9,10  ,, 

1.425 

vii.    3 

365 

XXX.    6 

11.545 

15 

II.  524 

ix.  22 

II.  261 

10 

545 

xvi.    4        ,, 

488 

X.  21 

1.466 

20 

1.447 

xviL    1        ,, 

•544 

xii.             ,, 

423 

xxti.    8          ,, 

419 

7 

I.  458 

22 

4^0 

xxxiii.  13        ,, 

429 

16 

II.  524 

36        ',', 

157 

xxxiv.    7        ,, 

422 

xviii.    6        ,, 

525 

siii.  18 

260 

xl.    5 

II.  54> 

12 

I.  165 

19 

459 

9,  10  „ 

1.430 

xix.    3 

II.    38 

xiv.  19 

231 

21 

1.234 

xvi.  1H,32  ,, 

417 

xxii.  12       ,, 

II.    93 

33 

417 

Leviticus. 

16 

528 

33,  .34,, 

418 

iv.    3  Vol.  I 

,  p.  374 

17 

1.378 

xvii.  1-7      ,, 

365 

12 

472 

xxiii.    4        ,, 

458 

16 

261 

V.    3 

II.    41 

XXV.    9 

II.    54 

xix.  1-6      „ 

496 

11-13  ,. 

I.  4^8 

23-30  „ 

I.  415 

3 

261 

vi.  13-16,20 

„      4  8 

xxvi.  24 

458 

4 

IT.  280 

16 

II.  549 

xxvii.  35        „ 

464 

6 

I.  128 

19-22  „ 

1.408 

39 

458 

5,6    „ 

145 

30 

472 

xxviii.    8        ,, 

46-1 

6 

128, 159 

vii.  12 

4: 2, 474 

13 

458 

10 

428 

vui.    6        ,, 

446 

xxxi.  42 

375 

10,11  ,. 

423 

30 

431, 44 i 

xxxii.  10 

I.  459 

16 

466 

ix.    7 

374 

,, 

II.  525 

18 

466,  467 

X.      it           „ 

423 

24,&c.  „ 

1.276 

xs.    5 

159 

10 

4  8 

xxxiii.  18        ,, 

II.  5+4 

12 

466 

^              » 

423 

xxxiv.  49        ,, 

49 

22 

42-1 

xiv.    4-6    „ 

4;<o 

xxxvii.    9        „ 

265 

xxi.    6        ,, 

442            1 

4,5    „ 

II.  2U2 

600 


PASSAGES    OF    SCRIPTURE 


Lkviticus  (continued.) 
XT.    5.  Vol.  I.,  p.  428 


Deuteronomy  (covlinved). 


8 
Iti,  i; 


2. 13  „ 

4 

6.11  „ 

8-Hi  „ 
12-16  „ 
14 
17 
18 
19 
24 

26,28  „ 
27 
30 
31 
.  5 
11 
11,12  „ 

7, 13, 14  , 
10 
17 
.    2 

5 

6 


xxiii.  10 
ixiv.    5,  9 
sxvi.  29 


423 

2(10 

423 
II.  547 
I.  4;?6 

447,520 

422 

435 

422 

154 

*J6 

II.  545 

1.  154 

II.  549 

I.  428 
472 
432 
431 
423 
428 
409 
447 
401 
4('9 
408 
408 
423 
428 

n.  472 

48 

1.415 

II.  b7 


Numbers. 


vL  .    Vol.1. 

3 

Tiii.  21 

xi.  29 

38 

xii.    7 


iiv 


XVI. 

xvl. 


XVll 

xmi 


XXIX. 

xxxi. 


.14 

28-30  „ 
.30 

-xviii.  „ 
.22 

47 
.  10 

12 
7       „ 

22 

22,23,26 
6 
9 
.    1-13  „ 

13 

6 

22-24  „ 
12 


,  P.-123 
423 

II.  431 
64 
118 

I.  365 
261 
261 
365 

II.  472 

I.  374 

463 

II.  545 

1.418 

409 

421 

II.  422 

„  I.  403 
430 
423 
365 
'^33 

II.  547 
1.114 

428 
26U 


Deuteronomt. 
i.  13,  Vol.  11.,  p.  58 


iv.  12 

24 

V.    9 

vi.    4 

ix.  19 

X.    2 

2,5 

12 

16 

xi  14 


466 

467 
II.    64 

54,83 
1.466 

418 

417 

II.    42 

I.  365 

II.    68 


XIV. 
XV. 

xvii. 
xviii. 

XX. 

xxi. 


XX'V, 
XXV 


XXVIII 

xxix. 
xxxi 
xxxii 


l.Vol 
17 

2-7    , 
15 

5 
16 
i;2,23  , 

14 
19 
14, 15  , 

4 
2o 

2 

6 
17 
ID 
35 
36 
18 
23 

6,8 
21 

5 

8 

10.11 
11 


40 
43 

1,3 
2 

36 
.    6 


I.,  p.  3.'-.2 
442 
44>< 
3t5 

4:^8 
42ii 
,  472 

IW 
2.S9 
555 
67 
163 

in 

48 

4Kt 

37 

51 

■.n 

1.418 

•16  J. 

390 

471 

4i:i 

II.  iU 

1.260,360 

II.    64 

65. 21^0 
T    j  331 ',344, 
^-   (     419 
450 
352 
II.  2.=>7 
I.  •166 
359 
449 
.     II.  .523 


Joshua. 

5,  Vol.  I.,  p.  471 

8        ..  268 


V.  15 

X.    3 

20 

liii.  22 

23 

xxi.  45 

xxiv.  30 

32 


212 

394. 

392 

114,260 

146 

4t,0 

260 

459 


Jldges. 


V.    4Vol.I.,  p.  467 
19        „    II.  319 
vi.    2        „       1.461 
407 
3h2 
460 
II.    53 
543 


xni.    o        ,, 

xiv.    6        ,, 

xviii.    6        „ 

xix.  10,  11  „ 


I.  S.Mlt  EI.. 

ii.    8  Vol.II._,p.09 
xii.    6 
XV.  12 

22 


xviii.  11         , 
xix.  10,  12  , 
XX.  30 
xxviii.  6        , 


I.  365 

259 

441,442 
II.    42 
I.  460 

4eo 

260 
349 


II.  Samuel. 
v.    fi  Vol.  II.,  p.  543 
vii.  14        „       1.  C62,351 


II.  Samuel  (coutiMud). 

viii.  2,Vol.  II.,p.274 
xii.  14        „  51 

xiii.  23  „  I.  394 
xvii.  34        „  4H0 

xxiii.  20        „  460 


I.   KiKGS. 


iii.  11 

vi.  23 

vii.  49 

viii.    9 

63 

xiii.    7 

22 

xvii.    1 

22, 

xviii. 

4, 
21 
42 


XIX 

10 

16 

XX.  11 

xxiii.  26 


12V. II., p.  37 

515 

„       1.414 

417 

428 

461 

„     II.  273 

76 

1.460 

II.    74 

1.461 

II.    37 

76 

1.461 

4'!1 

II.  42S 

I.  259 

461 


8.  I'i 


II.  Kings. 
i.    9,14Vl.lI.,p.l20 


10 
iii.  22 
iv.  14 

3.5-37   „ 
is.  2© 
X.  15,  23  „ 
xi.    7        ,, 


xii.    2 
XV.    9 

xvi.  15 
xvii.  14 

xxi.  12,13,,     11.274 
xxiii.  29        „  319 


273 

2.'>i' 

I. -460 

460 

II.    39 

I.  r21 

13d 

382 

II.    53 

1.428 

365 


I.  Cheonicles- 


ii.  55  Vol.  I.,  p. 
..    II. 


IV. 

xxi.  13        „       ] 
xxiii.  13        „ 
xxviii.  20        ,, 

22        „     I] 
xxix.  15        ,.       J 
23 

II.  Chroni 
iv.    8, 19 VII. ,1) 

17 
V.  10 
xxiv.  20-22 
xxvi.  16-21 

19 
xxix.  22 
XXXV.  3 


.521 
257 
449 
408 
471 
257 
459 
353 

LES. 
•115 

388 
417 
4<jl 
374 
419 
428 
418 


Ezra. 
ii.  61,62Vl.I.,p.401 

Nehemiah. 
5  Vol.  II.,  p. 


vii.  63,64 
X.  38 
xi.  22 


•101 
•105 
2£3 


Esther. 
ix  19,  ri  Vol.  II.,  p.  273 


QUOTED    OR    REFERRED    TO. 


601 


Job. 


i. 

6  Vol. 

I.,  p.  353 

iv 

18 

429 
II.    47 

vii. 

7        ', 

66 

xiv. 

•I 

38 

XV. 

30 

38 

xvi. 

255 

xix. 

255 

26,  27  ,', 

I.  2G1 

xxviii. 

1^ 

II.    58 

xxLx. 

18 

6) 

25 

I.  2S1 

xxxi. 

10 

259 

XXXV. 

U 

261 

xxviii 

28 

II.    39 

31 

39 

xlii. 

14 

1.259 

Psalms. 

ii.      Vol.  I. 


vii. 

13 

viii. 

6 

X. 

6 

27 

xi. 

7 

xii. 

2 

XV. 

1-5 

xvi. 

10 

xvii. 

15 

xix. 

8-11 

xxi. 

3 

6 

17 

xxii. 

XXIV. 

2 

xxix. 

1 

xxxii. 

1,2 

6 

xxxiii. 

12-16 

xxxiv. 

8 

10 

xxxviii. 

7 

xxxix. 

12 

13 

14 

xl. 

6,7 

7 

12 

xlii. 

3 

4 

xliv. 

23 

xiv. 

6 

6,7 

ilvi. 

5 

1 

5 

16-20 

lii. 

2-5 

Ivii 

5 

lix 

15 

IxvUi 

17 

28 

Ixix 

2 

Ixxi 

Ixxii 

13 

bcxiv 

19 

Ixxvi. 

2 

Ixxviii 

2 

Ixxix 

5 

Ixxxiii 

5 

Ixsxv 

2 

,  p.  409 

J  352, 370, 

(     :i79 

II.  2t9 

I.  352 

II.    66 

13 

431 

37 

1.451 

408 

262 

II.  454 

41 

3S 

1.357 

II.    42 

I.  359, 361 

217 

352 

II.    77 

I.  455 

166 

158 

464 

366 

458 

152 

146 

441 

II.    42 

I.  441 

261 

216 

472 

354 

11.248 

1.353 

457 

425 

II.    5-( 

57 

I.  368 

II.    73 

I.  358, 466 

432 

453 

5J0 

II  69 

254 

543 

1.282 

443 

407 

II.    77 


P.S..iIvMS    (CO 

nfi/iwcd). 

Canticle?. 

Lxxxvii.    1,  Vol. 

I.,  p.  457 

iv.    5,  Vol.  I 

.  p.  185 

Ixxxviii.  8        , 

II.  126 

vi.    8 

11.  492 

Iwfix.  50,51  „ 

1.458 

9 

487 

xc.    4        ,, 

217 

viii.    6        ,, 

64 

xcv.    6        ,, 

365 

10 

36S 

Isaiah 

xcvi.  10        ,, 

257 

xcvii.    7        ,, 

352, 354 

i.    6  Vol.  II 

.,p.  74 

cii.    3 

II.    m 

10 

273 

15 

3S 

1017  „ 

1.428 

25        ,, 

I.  353, 354 

11-17  ,, 

441 

civ.    1        ,, 

357 

18 

43 1 

4 

353 

21 

394 

35 

II.  476 

II.  215 

-,  J- 354, 395, 
^-  (.     409 

22        ',! 

67 

ex.            ,, 

ii.    2 

321 

1 

3)3,444 

5 

405 

4 

f  370,  374, 
l     39J 

12 

37 

12-19  „ 

255 

cxiv.    7        ,, 

467 

iii.    4        ,, 

1.235 

cxvi.  17        „ 

472 

9 

II.  273 

cxviii.  22        „ 

159 

10 

I.  553 

cxLx.             ,, 

614 

17 

2=.9 

,, 

11.      3 

V.    1-30   „ 

II.    29 

20 

64 

23 

92 

cxx.  3,  4     ,, 

57 

vi.    1-8     „ 

545 

5 

1.152 

vii.    6        ,, 

293 

cxxii.    3        ,, 

II.  .321 

9 

I.  2S0 

cxxxvi.   6        ,, 

1.217 

viii.             ,, 

359 

7 

II.    39 

14 

li9 

cxxxviiil9        ,, 

I  365 

18 

361 

cxxxix.  1 1        „ 

II.    40 

21 

387 

16 

I.  443 

ix.    5 

II.  544 

csl.  13 

II.    57 

6 

1.2)2,394 

cxlvi.    2        „ 

34 

8 

212 

X.    3 

lt)0 

xii.    3 

II.  461 

PKOVtEBS. 

xiii.             ,, 

514 

iii.  S,  6,  Vol 
11 
11, 12  „ 

.  11 ,  p.  20 

20 

I.    463 

6 

9,10,17 
10 

67 

,       265 

255 

21 

35S 

xiii.  ) 

320 

25 

165 

xxiii.  >         ,, 

34 

iv.  26        i,' 

172 
II.    20,60 
1.464 

xxiv.  ) 
xiv.    4-12   „ 
32 

514 
264 

vii.  16-23  „ 

II.    39 

18 

273 
67 
67 

317 

viii.  22 

I.  276 

31        „ 

ix.    5 

396 

XV.    3        ,, 

31 

171 

xvii.    5        ,, 

X.  12 

170 

xxiv.  22        ,, 

I.  454 

II.    20,77 

XXV.    7-9     ,, 

429 

xii.  10        "„ 
xiii.    3        , 
xvi.  27 

439 

40 
20 

xxvi.  11        ,, 

21 
xxvii.  13 

448 

II.  255 

1.195 

xvii.    9        , 

1.170 

xxLx.  13-21   „ 

473 

15 
xix.    3 
xxi.  10        ,, 
xxiii.  27 

II.    92 

47 

64 

1.259 

XXX.    4        ,, 
xxxi.    9 
xxxii.    1        ,, 
16 

432 

II.  323 

1.  394 

218 

34 
XXV.  14        , 
xxvi.  11        , 

27 
xxvii.  21         , 

II.    20 

1.233 

216 

11.    57 
I.  171 

xxxiii.             ,, 

li 
xxxiv.    3,  4    ,, 
4 

11 

II.    67 
I.  451 

II.  255 
1.218 

11.  274 
196 

xxviii.  21         , 

465 

xxxvii.    3 

XXX.  12        , 
13 

II.    20 
39 

xxxviii.  11        ,, 
xl.    6 

6,  7    „ 

I.  2)2 

II.    45 

38 

xlL    8 

54 

ECCLESIASTES. 

19 
xliii.  20 

257 
I.  159 

V.    2,  Vol.  II  p  20,40 

xliv.    4        ,, 

405 

X.    8 

1.  513,555 

xlvi.             „ 

It.  51t 

xii.    6 

IL    57 

xlvii.    5,  7    ,, 

4i8 

t)02 


PASSAGES    OF    SCRIPTURE 


liiA 

xlviii 


xlii. 
1. 

lii. 
liii. 


liv, 

Ivi. 

Ivii. 
Ivi. 
Ivii. 


lAU  (continued). 

8,  Vol.  I.,  p.  442 

9        „  J59 

22        „  II.    35 

2  „  256 

3  „  255 
5  „  I.  412 
5  „  164 
7  „  II.  68 
9        „  I.  164 

11  „  II.    92 
11,12,,  1.164 

12  „  164,429 
5        „  II.    60 

11  „  38 

12  „  321 
1        ..  1. 451 


''I 


199 


Ixi. 

Ixii.    4 
liiii. 


ixiv. 


Ixv. 
Ixvi. 


10  ,.  232 

19  „  473 

20  „  n.    37,234 

21  „  35 

16  „  I.  408 
1  „  405 

8  „  463 
21  „  II.    84 

1  ,.  428 

1.412 

1-6  „  II.  317 

3  ,,  317 

4  „  255 

9  „  I.  467 

11  „  476 

17  „  3G5 
10  „  II.  257 
10,  11  „  328 
25  „  I.  218 

7,8  „  11.279 


Jeremiah. 


ii.  12Vol. 

17 
iii.    3       „ 
8       „ 

iv.    3        ,, 
23 

23-26  „ 
V.  14 
24 
vi.  20        „ 
4        ,. 
16 

21-23  „ 
viii.   2,  7-12 

xi.  14 
xiv.    9        „ 

11 
XV.  16 
ivi., XXV.  ,, 

xvii.  26 
xviii.    710  ,, 
xxii.  13        ,, 
xxiii.    5        ,, 
It 
26 
XXV.  29 
xxvi.  23        ,, 
xxxi.  22        ,, 
31-34  „ 
33,34  „ 
xxxii.    4        ,, 
23 

XXXV. 


II.,  p.  60 

46 

68 

266 

I.  412 

390 

II.    39,265 

255 

273 

68 

I.  442 

II.    83 

473 

1.442 

423 

II.  473 

51 

473 

271 

320 

T.  472 

II.    67 

67 

I.  4"5 

II.  273 

I.  213 

171 

I.  461 

412 

412,424 

440 

II.  4!i7 

I.  461 

521 


Jeukmiaii  (continued). 

xxxviii.  33,  34,Vol.  I., p.  444 

xl.  „     LL  478 

li.    1        ,,  296 

27        „  270 

41        „  2:6 

Lamentations. 

ii.  7  8,V..l.  II.p  274 
iv.    7        „       1.510,521 


EZEKIEL. 


XVl. 

xvii. 

xviii. 
xix. 

xxi. 

xxii. 

xxiii. 

xxvi., 

xxxii. 

xxxiiL 

xxxav. 


9,Vol. 

3 
11 
4,6      , 

3 
21 

32        , 
4S,  49  , 

6 
10 
23 

1-9    , 
12 
26 
31 

xxvii   , 
7,8      , 
11 
21 
1-10    „ 


II.,p.271 

271 

,       I.  419 

,     II.  257 

415 

,  253 

60 

273 

I.  405 

II.    38 

I.  217 

II  283 

38 

I.  327 

,     II.  318 

64 


Daniel  (continued). 
xi.  31,  Vol.  II.,  p.  216 


II. 


320 

255, 265 
217 
473 
68 


11 
xxxvi.    5        ,, 

25 

25,  27  „ 
27 
xxxvii.  ,, 

10 

xxxviii.,  xxxix.    ,, 

xl. 

xliii.    2 

xliv.    2        ,, 

17 

Daniel. 


,233 

164 

448 

447 

412 

II.  64, 65 

67 

273 

321 

272 

256 
I.  5(W 

520 


iii.      Vol.  I.,  p.  460 


25 

31 

iv.    1 

14 

vi.  23 

25 

vii.  8, 20 

9 

10 


352 

1.54 

154 

138 

460 

154 

II.  2h7 

256 

I.  466 

II.  249 

256 

283 

272 

20,  279 

272 

1.349 

II.  271 

I.  429 

II.  216,  272 

256 

256 

T.  232 

,,     II.  258 

13, 20, 21  „  I.  360 

20,  21  „     II.  241 


13 

vii.  24 

25 

viii.  10 

13 

17 

26 

ix.  24, 25  „ 

27 
X.    5 
6,11,12 
13 


36 

, 

312 

xLi. 

1 

' 

1.232 
II.  241,  270 

4-9    , 

271 

7, 

11  , 

272 

11 

216 

13 

1.34a 

Hos 

FA. 

ii 

16, 

Vol 

I.,  p.  412 

23 

^ 

159 

iv. 

17 

, 

II.    68 

vi. 

6 

■ 

1.428,412 
II.    42 

viii. 

1 

^^ 

265 

X, 

7 

J, 

I.    77 

8 

II.  255 

xii. 

6 

42 

xiii. 

14 

196 

15 

38 

xiv. 

4 

, 

78 

Joel. 

ii.    3,  V. .1.11.,  p.  261 

10,31  „  255 

23        „  68 

28        „  428 

iii    4,15  „  255 

iv.    2, 11-14  „      317 

Amos. 
ii.    6,  Vol,  ir.,  p.  69 


7 

,       I.  515 

11,12 

549 

iv.    1 

2:i5 

V.    4 

451 

12 

515 

,     II.    72 

21,24 

,       1.442 

vi,    5-7 

,     11.  320 

Vii.    6,9 

274 

ix.    1 

,       I.  262 

12 

515 

,     II.    51 

Jon 

AH. 

iii.  10,  Vol 

.11.,  p.  67 

iv.    8 

38 

Mic^iH. 
i.    4,  Vol.  I.,  p.  218 


iv. 

9 
13 

; 

u 

196 
317 

v. 

2 

196 

vi. 

6-8 

I. 

442 

6,9 

II. 

42 

8 

J 

I. 

451 

vii. 

8 
Nah 

CM 

361 

i. 

6,Vol 

II 

•.p 

255 

iii. 

5 

, 

I. 

259 

Habakkdk. 

ii.    3,Vol.I.,  p.  217 

3,4    „  250 

4        „  321 

„     II.    54 

iii.  12        „  317 

Zephaniah. 
iii.    8,  Vol.  II.,  p.  318 


QUOTED    OR    REFERRED    TO. 


003 


HA.OOAI. 

ii.  6,7,Vol.I.,p.467 
7-9      „  •11(5 

Zechariah. 
iii.    l,2,Vol.I.,p.215 


1-3 

2 


3,4 


3,11 
4,5 
10 
14 
vi.  11-13 
12 
13 
is.    9 
11 
xi.    1 
xii.  11 
xiii.    1 
9 
xiv.  11 


,3 

235 

II.  523 

50 

272 

256 

272 

257 

258 
1.374 

447     ■ 

374 

392,  395 

394 

476 

435 

n.  319 

1.424 

II.  259 

321 


Malachi. 
ii.  17,  Vol.  I.,  p.  216 


467 

II.  253 

67 

47 

1.471 

394, 405 


APOCEYPHA. 

II.  ESDRAS. 

V.    3,  Vol.  II.,  p.  258 


1 

1,36 

30 

32 

35 

42-46 

45 
sdi.  42 
siU.  39^7 
XV.    » 


282 
284 
310 
309 
310 
320 
518 
I.  189 
II.  34 
255 


TOHIT. 

1.16, 17,  Vol.  II.,  p.  49 


17 
viii.  3 
xii.  15 


273 

268 

I.  36!) 

II.  268 

I.  349 


Judith. 

iv.  4  Vol.  II.,  p.  544 
V.  H  „  I.  152 
ix.  20        „     II.    49 

Wisdom  of  Solomon. 
ii.  1-24,  Vol.  II.,  p.  20 


6-20 

8 
12 
17 
2-1 
iii.    2 

7 


72 

20,38 

38 
1.471 
361 
204 
160 


Wisdom  of  Solomon  (cout.). 

.361 
2D 

20,66 
38 
2b9 
155 
64 


iv.  11,  Vol.  I.,  p. 
V.  8   „  II. 
9-14  ,, 
16 
vi.  1-4   „   I. 
12 

12,23  „  II. 
vii.  17-19  „ 
17-20  „ 
25,20  „  I. 
26 

„  II. 

is.  15   „   I. 

s.  5   „   II 

7   „   I. 

si.  6, 7   „  II. 

15, 16  „ 

17   „   I. 

xii.  10 

„     II 
16 
xiii.    1        ,,       I 
xvi.    1,9    „     II 
xvii.    2"       ,, 

2, 16, 17  „ 
17        „    I. 
xviii.  15, 16  ,, 
22 


20 

286, 322 
349 

40 
263, 288 

20,45 
232 
263 
318 
263 
465 

49 

20 
288, 457 
318 
318 
521 
214 
368 
322 


ECCLESIASTICnS. 

i.    l-ll,Vol.II.,r.59 
20,37 


28 

ii.  13 

18 

iii.    3 

30 

iv.    4 

V.  11 

14 

vii.  1)        „ 

xii.  11 

12 

xiv.  19 

23 

XV.    9 

11 

11-17  „ 
xs.    7        ,, 
15 
28 
xsii.  24        ,, 
xsviii.  10, 19  ,, 
15,26  „ 
xsix.  15        ,, 
xsxiv.    2        ,, 
19 
22 
xxsv.    2        ,, 
14 
22 
xii.  22 
xliv.  14, 15  „ 
xlv.    6-22  ,, 
11 
xlviii.    1        ,, 
1.    5-16  „ 


II. 


73 
450 
362 
362 
64 
20,  40 
57 
37 

20,  67 
40 
67 

20,40 
57 
20 
46 
20 

20,  37 

1.362 

II.    57 

20 

56 

1.407 

II.    67 

I.  362 

II.    67 

42 

40 

I.  217 

II.    20,  37 

178 

551 

1.408 

II.  273 

550 


Baruch. 

iv.    35,  Vol.  II.,  p.  320 

I.  Maccabees. 

1.21,  Vol.  I., p.  414 

ii.  28,29        „  461 

38        „  461 


I.  Mac'Cibees  {continued). 
iii.  45, 51,  Vol.  II.p.  272 
49        „       I.  549 


iv.  49 

60 

ix.  26 

xii.  12 


414 

II.  270 

I.  461 

461 


II.  Maccabees. 

i.  27,Vol.  I.,p.  152 

i..    7        „  412 

iii.  39        „  212 

iv.  48        „  232 

V.  26        „  461 

27  „  461 
vi.  11        „  461 

18-30  „  461 

Vii.             ..  4<51 

7-10  ,,  461 

9-36  „  461 

28  ,,  455 
ix.  19        „  II.    :^5 

s.    6        „  1.461 

xiii.  14        ,,  344 

III.  Maccabees. 
Extra  Apocryphal  Book- 

ii.    5,Vol.I.,p.  2il 


St.  Matthew. 


i.    5,  Vol. 

19        ',', 
ii.  11-15  „ 

12,22  „ 

23 
iii.    8-12  ,, 

9 
iv.    1-11  „ 

21 


4 
9 

10-12  , 

11 

12 

22 

23 

24 

25 

33-37  , 

35,36 

44 

4S 
vi.  14 

15 

19 

22 

24 

25 

30 
vii.    1 
1-5 
7-12 
16,17 
21-23 
viii.  29 
ix.  34 
37 
X.    3 
23 
xi.  19 


II. 


II. 


I.,  p.  460 
II.  83 
1.514 
II.  279 
1.411 
II.  65 
1.488 
II.  83,94 
65 
1.481 
f20,  44, 
I  51 
20 
59 
1.472 
171 
155 
20,54 
17 
20 
T.  126,172 
II.  20 
73 
1.515 
II.  20,  3j 
20 
20 
20 
424 
20,37 
1.456 
II.  45 
52,73 
20 
20 
57 
20 
54 
I.  349 
II.  496 

484,491 
II.  328 
42 


CO-l 


PASSAGES    OF    SCRIPTURE 


St.  Matthew  (conlinucd). 
xi.  36. Vol.  II., p.  455 


lii.  28 
31 


1.424 
II.  472 
1.377 
II.    50,02 

60 
1.377 
II.  208 
I.  216 
501 
526 
224 
401 
II.    49 
26        ,.  45 

39,40,49  ,,1.429 
55 


31,32 
37 
39 
43-15 

45 
46 

49,50 
50 
.  17 
23 


57 

.31 

.    1 

1-9 

16 

22 

.    4 

6-12 

18 

23 

28 


..I 


.    3 
4 

9-13  „ 
21 

24-27  „ 
.    6 
6,8,9,, 
17,18  „ 
22 
.  12 
21 
26 
28 

.    2        ',', 

12 
23 
24 

25-27  „ 
28 
.  13 
21 


22 

xxii.  23 

44 


6 

8,10  „ 
12 

16-22, 25 
25-37  „ 
35 

36 


3 

4.7 
5,11 
6,8 

8 
13 
14 


48  i,  497 

523 

301 

478 

473 

II.  117 

206 

60 

117 

f  124, 125, 

•  l     158 

125, 159 

418 

II.  328 

274 

I.  204 

II.  274 

1.515 

125 

II.  420 

245 

512 

I.  125 

II.  114 

36 

1.386 

125 

II.    35 

250      • 

38 

126 

127 

511 

1.423 

II.    61 

1.216 

II.    37,51 

37 

1.323 

396 

67 

50 

56 

45 

,  I.  512 

461 

456 

II.  211 

I.  300 

448 

472 

429 

II.  2.W 

425 

252 

2.50, 252 
190 
36 
317 


II. 


St.  Matthkw 

xxiv.  15,Vol. 
16 

28 
29 

29-"4  i 

31 

34 

37  ! 
51 
XXV.  5 
14 
21 
35 

35-40 
sxvi.  64        , 

69 

xxvii.  32 

46 

51 

56 

xxviii.    2 

19 

20 


(continued). 

II.,p.216 

280 

232 
,  I.  217 
,     II.  264 

256 

257, 258 
,       I.  366 
,     II.  328 
,       I.  125 

401 

214 
,  II.  419 
,       I.  155 

470 
,  II.  53 
,       1.551 

519 
,       I.  472 

361 

447 
,  II.  275 
,  I.  484 
,  II.  275 
74 
,       I.  429 


St.  Luke  (co»(iiiu«d). 


i.  15,  Vol 

19 

20 
iii.  14 

17 

18 

31 
iv.  34 


4 

13 

1-15 

5-13  , 
20-23  , 

2 

21,  26  , 
33 
38 

43-47  : 
X.  27 


LX. 


42 

xi.  21 

xiii.    7 

7,8 

8 

9 

14 

29 

32 

xiv.  70 

XV.    7 

40 

xvi.  18 


I.,  p.  376 

481 

II.  107 

I.  :«i5 

II.  110 

I.  484 

501 

213 

I  484, 507, 

t     523 

523 

II.    74 

I.  423 

512 

II.    41 

I.  164 

II.    54 

117 

117 

245 

1.386 

II.  124, 490 

127 

1.501 

II.    20,250 

253 

196 

21 

216 

20 

20 

I.  519 

II.    61 

,       1.484 

370 

,     II.  150 


St.  Ltjkk. 
i.    6,  Vol.  I.,  p.  514 


11 

36 

43 

50 

52,53 

58 

68 


419 

497 

II.  507 

I.  501 

II.    09 

453 

I.  100 


ii.  26  Vol. 

29 

44 
iii.  11 
iv.    5,6    „ 

24 

25 

:« 

V.  10 

39 
vi.  15 

16 

20 

22 

22,  23  , 

32 

35 

36 
vii.  40 

42 

50 
viii.  19        , 

24 

31 

48 
ix.  25 

31 

35 

49 

54 

54,55  , 
X.  18 

30 

34  ', 
55 
xi.  13 
20 
21 
26 
28 

40        ', 
xii.  25 
35 

55 

58 
xiv.  11         , 

12 
xvi.  31        , 
xvii.  , 


xviii.  3 
7, 
12 
14 

27 
XX.    3 

44 
XX.  17, 

21 


II. 


I.,  p.  411 
231 
497 
488 
459 
523 
II.  7i 
I.  l'-9 
484 

158, 483 

II.  Ill 

I.  222,223 

II.    51,69 

I.  472 

II.    36 

103 

158 

73 

508 

1.212 

II.    53 

1.501 

II.    37 

206 

53 

I.  450 

471 

212 

II.  117, 118 

1.488 

II.  122 

200, 280 

I.  4C0 

II.    30 

74 

122 

37 

1.424 

421 

387 

224, 502 

40 

41 

I.  150 

1-29 

405 

II.    38 

I.  126 

II.    45 

1.497 

II.  274 

1.448 

II.    92 

I.  126 

11.254 

I.  514 

335 

II.    45 


18 


xxi.    9 

19 

2J 

21 

24 

25 

25,26  „ 

26 

28 
xxii.  20        ,, 

24 

24-20  „ 


II. 


II 


386 

375, 485 

160 

159 

551 
38 
1.450 
II.  149, 193 

280 

272 

259 

318 
I.  4<>7 

423 

428 
II.  117 

511 


QUOTED    OR    REFERRED    TO. 


60: 


St.  Luke  (continiied). 
xxii.  28,  Vol.  11.,  p.  36 


31 

I. 

126 

3J 

151 

4;3 

375 

xxiii.  3t 

554 

II. 

131 

36 

2.56 

W 

I. 

Iftt 

xxiv.  12    ,, 

129 

^, 

II. 

40 

18 

1. 

491 

21 

423 

25 

ir. 

117 

27 

I 

443 

31 

II. 

135 

39 

402 

•il 

I 

375 

51 

164 

JOH 

(f. 

i.  l.Vol 

II.  P 

.403, 406 

2 

367 

3 

I. 

268 

3-10  „ 

349 

4  ,,11.402,403,406 

4^9  „ 

419 

5 

406 

7 

460,462 

9 

I. 

411 

II. 

403 

11     ! 

365 

12 

403 

13 

48, 403 

14 

I 

423 

II 

335, 403 

14-17  ] 

459 

18 

403 

45 

461 

ii.  2 

462 

•i 

I 

221,501 

13 

II 

335 

19 

I 

423 

iii.  3,7,31 

„  II 

39 

5 

461 

10 

422 

19 

406 

.36 

368 

iv.  6 

128, 335 

10 

461,462 

14,  36  , 

368 

22 

365 

35-38  , 

140 

37 

453 

44 

,'  I 

.523 

V.  24 

,  11 

368 

31-37  , 

400 

32 

509 

33 

460 

35 

39 

36 

460 

3!),  40, 

45  „ 

460 

\i. 

462 

6,61,61  „ 

116 

25 

, 

497 

27 

1 

368 

29 

496 

40,47, 

ii  „ 

3i)8 

4.5 

109 

51-56 

,  I 

.  472 

vii.  1-10 
4 

; 

503,  526 
527 

5 

491,527 

7 

224 

',   11 

.  41 

St.  John  {coniinued). 
vii.  33, 42,  Vol.  II.,  p.65 


35 

31 

33 

461 

viii.  12 

406 

14 

■160 

18 

460 

21-24  „ 

471 

31 

411 

32 

41 

32,  40  „ 

459 

33 

83 

34 

I.  216 

44 

361 

51   „ 

II.  335 

56 

I.  458 

58 

II.  48 

ix.  5 

30 

31 

468 

X.  4 

49G 

7-9  „ 

I.  552 

II.   73 

11,15,17,18  „  440 

16 

I.  164 

2a   „ 

428 

25 

II.  460 

36 

I.  364 

xi.  9,  10  „ 

II.  415 

33 

116 

41,  42  „ 

468 

48-50  „ 

210 

52 

I.  152 

54 

11.  123 

55 

I.  1.58 

xii.  16   „ 

II.  117 

25 

368 

30 

I.  212 

31 

II.  280 

xii.-xvii.     ,, 

375 

xiii.  1    ,, 

417 

1-6  „ 

I.  126 

1,3,11, 

21 II.  116 

12-15  „ 

417 

14 

75 

18   , 

109 

22 

128 

23   , 

116 

25 

128 

33 

420 

31 

456 

34,  35  , 

412, 417 

37,  38  , 

410 

xiv.  6   , 

I.  447 

, 

II.  335,  408 

10 

I.  423 

15 

II.  456 

16 

(•410.411, 
(  471 

16,  17  , 

495 

16,  26  , 

410 

17 

459 

26 

508 

XV.  4,5,7 

429 

5 

431 

11 

405 

13 

440,  507 

26 

(  410,  459, 
I     460 

27   , 

460 

xvi.  7   , 

410 

12 

335 

13 

4,59 

14 

460 

23 

455 

26 

471 

30 

453 

St.  John  (continufd) 
xvii.  2,  3, Vol.  II.,  pi..367,4'29 
3 


( '105,  478, 


9. 15,  20 
11 

11,  17  „ 
14^26  „ 
15 
17 
23 
•  4 
14 
15 
26 
28 


37 
xix.  11 


27 


5-11  , 

6   ! 
12 

14 

21-23  , 
29 
30 

4 

5 

6 

7-20  , 

8 
15 
16 

17   , 

17,  18  , 
19 
21 
24 


,11. 


479 
,51) 
„  471 

I.  230 
II.  459 

454 
41 
48 
457 
II.  116 
210 
129 
I.  497 
II.  41 
J  444, 459, 
\      460 
I.  161 
II.  39,248 
(484,491, 
•  )   492 

I.  502 
II.  116 
)  113, 148, 
i      365 
116,509 
133,  tf^n 
13.3,  460 
116 
I.  156 
II.  40 
l:i4 
335 
135 
512 
I.  155 
II.  133 
135 
420 
I.  375 

II.  116 
136 
i:i6 

I.  172 
II.  136 
\  136,442, 
■(   443 
I.  211 
119 
II.  136 
460, 50H 


Acts. 
i.  8  Vol.  II.,  p.  274 


13 

I. 

223 

J, 

II. 

137 

14 

I. 

502,528 

16 

159 

17 

210 

2 

204, 212 

9 

I. 

1,5.3 

II. 

488 

9-12  i 

10 

15 

I. 

204 

16,20,40  II. 

328 

17 

I. 

156 

17. 18  „ 

11 

428 

20 

I 

196 

22 

1.57 

27   , 

408 

31 

156 

32 

128 

32-30  , 

128 

<;0() 


PASSAGES    OF    SCRIPTURE 


Af-rs  Cfoii'iiii/ed).             | 

Acts  {cont 

iiutcd). 

ACT.S  (cm 

iiiiued). 

ii.  36,  Vol. 

I.,  p.  364 

xii.  14,  Vol. 

I.,  p.  375 

xxvi.     7,  Vol 

.11    p.  35 

38 

II.     74 

17 

533 

10 

,    II.    71 

40 

I.  129 

20 

II.  4U 

11 

,      I.  461 

47 

Ui 

25 

I.  5:!5 

19 

364 

lii.     6        „ 

157 

28 

375 

26 

476 

10 

196 

xiii.  15        „ 

476 

xxvii.  14 

173 

( 196, 204, 
i      210 

39 

335 

xxviii.  22 

,    II.  337 

12 

II.    95 

28 

,      I.  147 

13 

164, 477 

43        ',', 

I.    65 

31 

403 

15 

r 128, 335, 
1361,462 

44 
xiv.  15 

428 
II.    74 

KOMANS. 

16 

11.    36,74 

XV.                 ,, 

245 

i.    1  Vo 

.11.,  p.  .32,  33 

17 

1.  157 

2 

I.  230,  536 

4 

„      I.  352 

18 

128 

5        " 

11.  ;«7 

10 

„    II.  507 

19-21  . 

II.  328 

7 

I.  117 

16 

„      I.  147 

19-26  , 

I.  128 

9 

1.58 

„    II.     40 

19-31  , 

161 

10 

423,  513 

17 

„      I.  321,450 

24 

156 

11.     41,  52 

18 

157 

iv.     1 

,    II.  137 

11 

I.     94 

20 

288 

1-6    , 

51 

13 

485,  539 

24 

„    II.  422 

,      I.  128 

13-21  , 

II.     82 

28 

„      I.  188 

' 

,    II.     74 

14-21  , 

32 

ii.    4 

188,218 

11 

,       1.  128 

17 

I.  156,515 

6-10 

„    II.    98 

13        , 
13,  19 

,    II.  108 

19 

539 

8 

407 

177 

20 

470,  477 

13 

53,92,97 

21 

,      I.  477 

23 

II.     35 

17 

38 

24 

204,  231 

24 

I.  116 

17-20 

83 

V.  17 

,    II.     51,337 

II.     28 

18 

„      I.  376 

28-32 

,      I.  161 

XV!.    14           , 

I.     65 

22 

65 

30 

128 

II.  493 

24 

„    II.    51 

5335,  361. 
\     462 
128 

xvii.              , 

377 

29 

„      I.  165 

31 

6 

,      I.  161 

iii.    8 

218,229 

32 

12 

,    II.    51 

20 

„    II.    92,423 

40-12 

161 

13 

,      I.  478 

21-24 

„      I.  101 

41 

,    II.  507 

29 

210 

24 

453 

TI.      1 

,      I.  341 

30 

157 

25 

323,362 

,    II.    41 

xviii.     2        , 

,    II.  493 

„    II.  411 

6 

,       I.  376 

5 

51 

27 

41 

9 

478 

18 

,      I.  3:^2,649 

28 

79,  99 

vii.     2 

488 

24 

337 

iv.    2 

79 

6 

152 

24-28  . 

337, 338 

3 

95 

12 

,    II.    51 

25 

343 

3,9,22  „           93 

16-13 

,      I.  403 

26 

3.i7 

4 

4 

20 

459 

xix.     1 

,      I.  337 

8 

„      I.  457 

22 

466 

9 

365 

11 

165 

23 

358 

,    II.  508 

13 

457 

29 

152 

26    ; 

,      I.  428 

17-19 

458 

38 

367 

29 

,    II.  506 

18 

„    II.    90 

62 

,    II.     71 

33 

51 

20 

37,  51 

viii. 

345 

41 

,      I.  477 

25 

„      I.  137,429 

1 

141 

XX.    4 

,    II.  506 

V.      1 

„    II.    79 

11 

307 

19 

36 

2 

„      I.  134 

14 

140 

20-27 

,      I.  451 

16 

„    11.    39 

17 

376 

28 

145, 159 

20 

„      I.  218 

20 

„      I.  157 

^9 

235, 471 

„    II.  443 

ix.    2 

„    II.  508 

xxi.    8 

485 

vi.    1 

„      I.  135 

16 

507 

10 

212 

1-15 

135,136 

X.    2 

,,      I.  128 

17-25 

,    II.    82 

2 

164 

20 

235 

20 

,      I.  225,5.3:5 

6 

129 

„    II.    51 

21 

,    II.     87 

7 

135 

22 

„      I.  411 

24 

,      I.  1.58 

12 

„    II.  42i 

28 

163 

25 

477 

12-14 

„      I.  134 

34 

157 

27 

478 

vii.  14 

407 

38 

„    II.  427 

29,30 

,    II.  426 

17 

„    II.  434 

39 

„      I.  128 

38 

61 

22 

„      I.  165 

40 

128 

xxii.  11 

,      I.  375 

23 

129, 160 

41 

128 

12 

550 

viii.    3 

134,362 

42 

128 

xiiii.     1 

476 

4 

185 

4:^ 

128 

8 

323 

13 

135 

xi.  19 

115 

12 

„    II.    62 

15 

137,157 

26 

147 

22 

„      I-  477 

„    n.    48.453 

30 

535 

26 

„    II.    35 

18 

„      I.  129 

xii.     2 

486 

ixiv.     5-14 

3:i7 

19-2C 

„    II.  424 

„    II.  176 

16 

„      I.  138,476 

19-22 

48 

3 

„      I.  352 

ixvi.    5 

„    II.     41,337 

21 

„      I.  216 

QUOTED    OR    REFERRED    TO. 


607 


Romans  (confinucd).           | 

I.  CORIXTHIANS 

(continued). 

I.  Corinthians  (confinued). 

viii.  24,  Vol. 

I.,  p.  317 

iii.     13,  Vol. 

I.,  p.  448 

XV.  52, Vol. 

II.,p.258 

24-25  „ 

453 

il.    98 

xvi.             , 

96 

34 

129 

16        W 

1.365 

1 

1.378 

ix.    2        ,, 

1.218 

19 

II.    73 

12 

338 

5 

216 

23 

51 

15 

II.    48 

15 

326 

iv.    4 

I.  476 

22 

328 

1« 

365 

9 

450 

19 

II.    46,53 

19 

II.    67 

II.  Corinthians. 

25        , 

I.  159 

V.     1-11   „ 

1.  227 

i.    l,Vol 

I.,  p.  342 
459 

25-32  , 

129 

5 

170 

5 

29 

II.    68 

11.473,474 

ii.    6-8    ,' 

II.  475 

32 
32,33  , 

1.376 
159 

9        \\ 
10 

508 
1.470 

7,10  , 
9 

1.383 
II.    60 

33 

159 

II.  162 

14 

I.  470 

X.    7 

476 

vi.    1 

I.  342 

iii. 

336 

9 

II.    90 

9 

470 

1 

547 

xi.  22 

I.  165 

9-18  , 

231 

3 

407 

33 

11.245 

12-20  , 

218 

f48,  158, 
t     295 

/  321, 382, 

\     4*40 

36 

I.  295 

17 

II.    90 

iv.   2 

xii.    1        , 

f  158, 159, 
\     443 

vii.    5        ,, 
12,13  , 

I.  165,504 
II.  500 

4 

1-21  , 

344,449 

19 

99 

16 

165 

2 

129, 157 

22 

1.470 

V.     1 

211,288 

5        \ 

II.    90 

viii.  13 

II.  345 

II.  423 

6 

1.129 

ix.    1 

1.294 

7 

\       1.  453 

8 

II.    37 

2 

216 

10 

,     II.    98 

9 

1.470 

5        . 

/117,  198, 
\     226 

14 

,       I.  134 

10 

469 

II.      4 

13 

469,473 

13 

472 

21        ', 

l!  429 

II.  505 

18 

II.  508 

vi.    2 

326 

19 

T    1295,330, 
'■■  \     344 

X.    4 

1.231,241 
II.  522 

16,17  ' 
vii.    1         , 

326 
,     II.  431 

xii.-xvi.            , 

,     11.    96 

7,8    \ 

244 

10 

I.  465 

xiii.  1-1    , 

1.129 

8        , 

1.215 

12        , 

383 

1-7    , 

58,  289 

11.  437 

viii.    4 

',           312 

II.  247 

11        ', 

328 

ix.              , 

,     II.    96 

5        \ 

I.    59 

13 

1.471 

4 

I.  452 

10 

II.    51 

II.  408 

8 

'     II.    96 

11,13  , 

328 

20 

288 

13 

,       I.  473 

12 

419 

21 

,       I.  233 

xi.    2 

,     II.    60,114 

xiv.             , 

,       I.  471 

32 

II.  245 

13, 14 

241 

7        , 

344 

xi.    7 

508 

17 

I.  452 

21 
XV.  14 

,     II.  245 
,       I.  211 

19 

,       I.  213 
II.  337 

20 

229 
,     II.  505 

25 

378 

23 

,       I.  294 

22 

,       I.  341 

33 

/295,  344, 

,     II.  103, 104 

24 

341 

t.     476 

25        \ 

I.  425 

29 

,     II.  245 

xvi. 

58 

30 

233 

xii.  12 

I.  331 

,     ir.  493 

31,  .32  , 

170 

13 

,     II.  402 

3        \ 

,       I.  338 

xii.    2 

II.  507 

21 

I.  227 

11 

59 

3 

,       I.  232 

17 

129 

,     II.  446 

Gaiatians. 

20 

476 

8 

37 

23 

332 

9 

76 

i.    l.Vo 

.  I.,  p.  359 

,     II.  505 

10 

,       1. 212 

,     II.  104 

,     11.  446 

1-12 

,       1.291,331 

I.  ConiNTHIANS. 

xiii.              , 
5,6    , 

59 
.       I.  170 

5 
9 

477 
229 

7,Vol.II.,p.328 

9 

349 

10 

,     II.  441 

9 

,       1.447 

12 

440 

i.  11— ii.  21 

103 

,     11.408 

,     II.    40 

i.  11-15 

,       I.  294 

13-15 

74 

13 

,       I.  447 

13 

476 

14 

605 

xiv.    5        , 

173 

18,19 

,       I.  532 

26 

12,  68 

26-31  , 

,     II.    55 

19 

f  485,  489, 
•       t     495 

30 

,       1. 394 

33 

38 

ii.    6 

282 

XV. 

,       I.  319 

,     II.  143 

10 

,     II.  245 

3 

,     II.  101 

u.    2 

103 

14 

58 

7 

T  (485,489, 
•    ^-l     529 

4 

,       I.  230 

14, 15  , 

80 

6 

294, 554 

iii.    1 

,       1.406 

21 

,     II.  328 

7.9 

117 

1,2 

37*^  382 

22 

,       I.  450 

9 

f  152, 485, 
\     534 

1,  10 

158 

,     II.    48,423 

2 

,     II.  560 

27 

,     1. 3;o 

„     II.   82,103 

4-6 

,       1.  338 

32 

,     II     6iJ,  283 

10 

„       I.  378 

10 

218 

35 

53 

12 

230,451 

608 


PASSAGES    OF    SCRIPTURE 


Galatiaks  (cojifiniicd). 
ii.  14,  Vol.  I., p.  471 


16        ,. 

453 

.  19, 20  „ 

134 

20 

319 

n.    4 

ii.    1 

•I.  403 

7 

165 

11 

450 

13 

164,323 

16 

326 

19 

314,358 

19,  CO  „ 

412 

26 

453 

II.    48 

IV.    3 

I.  37o 

10,  2-1.  „ 

II.    .52 

19 

I.  165 

24 

94 

V.     1 

II.    41 

6 

99 

10 

1.476 

16 

II.     4 

20 

1.213 

II.  337 

24        ',', 

I.  IM 

vi.    7 

377 

12 

229 

12,  13  „ 

471 

13 

216,227 

13-26  „ 

218 

15 

II.    99 

Epiiesiaks. 

i.      Vol.] 

.,  p.  316 

3       .. 

129, 154 

4-7    „ 

129 

7 

11.405 

8 

58 

13 

48 

14 

1.159 

15 

319 

17        „ 

4fc8 

20 

129 

ii.    2 

231 

3 

157 

8 

129 

8,9    „ 

11.    79,89 

10 

I.  1.54,362 

11,  12  „ 

11.  442 

13 

1.344 

18 

134, 369 

20 

159 

iii.    2 

294 

2,3    „ 

asi 

4-8    „ 

302 

8 

II.  507 

12 

1.3e9,447 

1^ 

II.  447 

16        W 

I.  165 

iv.  14 

C33,471 

II.     37 

22 

I.  462 

25 

II.  405 

h2 

73 

'•              >. 

9li 

1,2    „ 

414 

3 

I.  227 

3-5    „ 

470 

5 

n.  40 

7 

162 

8 

I.  157 

8,9,11- 
14 

■  1 11.405 

14 

I.  237 

Ephesians  (co.ilinucd). 
V.  14,  Vol.  II.,  p.  65 


21 

1.  129 

22 

129, 429 

26 

447 

vi.              ,, 

II.    96 

5 

I.  129 

10 

350 

12 

231,  361 

II.  190 

14        ", 

I.  156 

23 

230 

PUILIPPIANS. 

i.    7,  Vol. 

I.,  p.  4-0 

8 

11.    60 

21 

90 

25 

I.  476 

27 

157 

28 

148 

30 

148 

ii.     5-11  , 

300 

6 

380 

7 

443 

8 

34t 

9 

142, 361 

II.  507 

10 

249 

H 

I.  142 

13 

476 

15 

II.    39 

24 

I.  476 

iii.     2 

64 

II.  377 

5 

I.  341 

7 

II.    90 

7-11  , 

,      I.  469 

12 

,    II.    56 

19 

4i,£8 

20        , 

I.  146 

II.  328 

iv.              , 

96 

2 

493 

3 

I.  466 

5 

,    II.  328 

7        , 

,      I.  155 

8 

192 

9 

476 

22 

59 

CO^CSSIANS. 

i.       Vol 

I.,  p.  135 

4 

319,  447 

5 

319 

9 

,    II.     58 

10 

,      I.  211 

,    II.    96,507 

15 

,      I.  321 

17 

350 

20 

,    II.  405, 54t 

24 

,      I.  459 

ii. 

231 

3 

,    II.     37 

4 

40 

0 

,      I.  423 

10-15 

168 

14,  15 

325 

16 

,    II.    49 

16-23 

,      I.  471 

18 

232 

,    II.    41,410 

18-C3 

,      I.  504 

iii. 

,    II.    96 

5 

,      I.  470 

9 

462 

CoLOSSiAKS  {continued). 
iii.  12,Vol.  I.,  pp.  172,321 

23        „  1€3 

iv.  „    II.    96 

3        „      I.  476 

10        „  497 


11        „    II.  508 
11-15  „      I.  336 

18        „           450 

I.  Thessalonians. 

i.     3Vol.I.,p.  295,378, 

417 

4        „           152 

10        „           461 

14-16  „    II.  377 

ii.     1        „      I.  447 

9        „     II.  508 

12        „           507 

14        „             36 

li-16  „      I.    64 

15        „           148 

„    II.  377 

18        „      I.  476 

iii.     2        „    II.  508 

4        „      I.  148 

iv.    3        „           4i3 

6        „           227,470 

9        „           469 

13-17  „    II.  328 

iv.  13-v.  11      I.  218 

15        „           216 

„    n.  423 

16        „      I.  232,430 

V.     1-16  „    II.  328 

9        ,,      I.  159 

20        „           212 

23        „           476 

24        „           447 

„    II.  408 

25        „      I.  476 

26        „    II.    75 

28        „             36 

II.  Thefsalonians. 

i.    4Vol.  I.,p.  147 

7-10  „    II.  328 

8        „      I.    65,430 

„    II.  407 

ii.    3        „      I.    71 

„    II.  426 

3-12  „           136 

10        „      I.  215 

17        „      II.  96 

iii.    2        „      I.  147 

I.  Timothy. 

i.    4Vol.  I.,p.  212 

6        „            464 

17        „           3t9 

18        „           212 

20      ..n.{^-^^- 

ii.     4        „      I.  217 

5        ..          412. 423 

„     II.  410 

9        „      1.  165 

10         ,,     II.     96 

iii.     2         „       I.  4<>9 

„    II.  505 

3        „             59 

6        „             36 

15        „      I.  365 

16        „            167 

iv.     1         „            139 

QUOTED    OR    REFERRED    TO. 


609 


I.  Timothy  (continued). 
1,  Vol.  II.,  pp.  58,  328 


3 

J   (470,471, 
'■■  \      504 

II.  560 

7        ', 

I.  212 

16 

386 

V.  10 

II.     96 

13 

508 

15 

I.  464 

17       , 

II.     69 

22 

41 

n.    3 

I.  369 

14 

,    II.    41 

18 

,      I.  473 

, 

,    II.    96 

II.  TiJ 

lOTHT. 

i.    7  Vol. 

I.,  p.  157 

18        , 

,    11.  506 

ii.  15 

48,496 

16 

,      I.  462 

17 

,    II.  241,506 

19 

432 

24 

68 

iii.     1 

328,423 

8 

,      I.  241 

17 

,    II.    96 

iv.     4 

,      I.  464 

2 

,    II.  169 

9-21 

,      I.  340 

14 

,     II.  473 

17 

282 

19 

„      I.  332,338 

Tn 

DS. 

i.     8Vo 

.  I.,  P.  469 

„    II.  505 

ii.    7-14 

96 

12 

422 

13 

',',      I.  210 

14 

423 

iii.    1 

„      I.    58 

5 

154 

8 

„    II.    96 

9 

„      I.  462 

„    II.    61 

10 

„      I.  213 

13 

338, 345 

„    II.  507 

15 

„      I.  447 

Phil 

EMON. 

7Vol.  II.,p.  505 
9        „  484,574 

22        „      I.  476 


Hebrews. 


Vol 
1 
1-4 


4 
5 

5,6 
5-14 

8,9 
13 


I.,  p.  323 

299, 313 
322, 349, 
350 
II.  328 
I.  297, 299, 
300,452, 
453,488 
412 

352,445 
297 

352,  ,353, 
363,364 
297 
444 
323 


n  n 


EWS   (COTl 

ivnixid^. 

1,  Vol.  I. 

^-o.-sn 

1,4    ., 

358.359 

1-5    „ 

363,364 

2 

313 

3 

291, 294, 

313,331, 

343,465 

3,4    „ 

376 

5 

316 

5-8    „ 

299 

5-18  „ 

359-332 

6 

326 

6-16  , 
7 
8 
9 

9,10 
10 


17 


17,  18  , 
18 


1-6 


3 

3,4  „ 

6 

7 

7-15  , 

7-19  ', 

9 
10 
12 

14 
15 
16 
17 

1 

1-10  , 

1-13 ; 
3,4  : 

4 

5 

7 

8 

9 
11 

11-13 
12 

12,13 

14 

14-16 

15 

16 


II.  541 
1.363,364 
297 
299 
324 
325 

295, 324, 
335,  375, 
409, 504 

320. 323, 
444 

352 

156,297, 
303 

302. 324, 
364, 369, 

370, 373 
363, 354 
445 

369, 445 
363,364, 
365 
327 
II.  531, 541 
1.412,456 
341 
337 

313,326, 
365 
297 
11.541 
I.  363,364, 
366 
313 
366 

365, 377, 
450 

452,453 
366 
297 
231 
313 
304 

363,364 
297 
367 
352 
460 
367 

302,411 
428 

367, 368 

158, 313, 

322, 455 

,     II.  526 

,       1.308,322 

341,447 

,  364,368, 

369 

324,429 
,     11.542 
,       1.445 
,     II.  467 


11-14  „ 

V.  11— vi.  20 
V.  12 
14 
^Ji.    1 


Hebrews  (continued). 

V.    l-3,Vol.  I.,  pp.  370,373, 
374 
1-10  „      ■     445 

2  „  299,448 
„     II.  542 

2,  3    „       I.  422 

3  „  302, 440 
4^10  „         370,!374, 

375 

5  „  297 

6  „     II.  366 

8  „       1. 299, 324 

9  „  325 

10  „  391 

11  „  341 
II.    40 

I.  342, 370, 
375, 

.,  445 
129 
299 

311, 319, 
341,424 

II.  418 
1-3    „       1.370 
1-8    „  376,377 
2        „          323,337, 

476 

4  „  294,304, 
450 

4,  5    „  317,318 

4-6    „     II,  471 

4-8    „      I.  308, 328, 

335,  370, 

448,465 

„     II,  531 

5  „       I.  316,359 
„     II.  542 

6  „  I.  392 
8  „  378 
9,  10  „  370 
9-12  „  450 
9-20  „  377-379 

10  „  295,342, 
469 

11  „  378 
11-18  „  370 
11,  18, 19  „  447 

13  „     447 
„  11.542 

14  „   I.  297 

15  „  461 
17   „     362,444 

19  „  318 
19,  20  „     370 

20  „    324, 326, 
447 

.  1-3  „  370,392 

1-17  „  304 

1-28  „  445 

2,  10  „  324 

3  3ii4 

3, 10, 25  „   297 

4,  10  „  371, 403, 

404 

5, 6, 9  „  409 

5,11,27  „  302 

6-8  „  414 

11  „  413,440 
11,  12  „  371 
11-19  „  407 
11-25  „  444 

12  „  314, 406 

13,  14  „   I.  371 

14,  21  „     297 


610 


PASSAGES    OF    SCRIPTURE 


Hebrews  (conlimted). 
vii.    15,  Vol.  I.,  p.  326 


15-19  „ 

371 

17 

II.  512 

18 

I.  412 

18,  19  „ 

472 

19,  22  „ 

299,  314 

20,  21  „ 

■k)7 

20,  22  „ 

371 

22 

412 

22,  25  „ 

408 

23,  24  „ 

299 

21,  25  „ 

371 

25 

3  i9, 407 

26 

324,429, 

444 

2f>-28  „ 

408,409 

27        „ 

291,422, 

441,  444 

39 

299 

1 

297,300, 

3U,407, 

4t4 

1-6    „ 

371 

1-7    „ 

411,412 

l-ix.  28 

„    445 

2 

316 

5        ',', 

316, 428, 

4Kt 

5,8    „ 

297 

6 

31  (.,413 

7,8    „ 

299 

7-13  „ 

371 

8-12  „ 

4  to 

8-13  „ 

413 

9 

3)1 

10 

302 

10-12  „ 

4tt 

10,  12  „ 

II.  273 

1 

I.  316,414 

1-.5    „ 

414, 415 

1-10  „ 

304 

1-14  „ 

372 

3        „ 

447, 467 

3,4    „ 

291 

4 

40S 

5 

488 

II.  411 

&-10  ',', 

I.  421,423 

7 

460 

7, 19  „ 

302 

8 

299,414 

8, 12  „ 

411,447 

9 

316 

10        „ 

376, 471 

11 

314,440 

11.  12  „ 

298 

11-14  „ 

423, 424 

12 

447 

12-28  „ 

474 

13 

129,154, 

467 

13,  U„ 

323 

u 

314, 376, 

411,429, 

417 

IT.  405 

15        ',', 

I.  299,324, 

326,423, 

425,457, 

461 

15-17  „ 

407 

15-18  „ 

476 

15,  22  „ 

324,372 

16,  17  „ 

425 

„ 

II.  542 

Hebrews  (continued). 

ix.     18-28,Vol.  I.,pr>.l,54, 
428, 429 
20        „  425 

22  „      I.  321 

23  „  314, 316 
23-28  „  372 

24  „  316,411, 

429 

25  „  408 
25-28  „           475 

26  ,,  349,429 
28        „          16-1.299, 

429 
X.     1-3    „  408 

1-10  „  301,372, 

410 
1-18  „  440,444, 

446 

1,  22  „  369 

2  „  310 

2,  22  „  323 

3  „  II.  542 
5-7,30  „  I.  297 
9        „  460 

10-14  „  323 
10, 14, 29  „     320 

11  „  291 
11,  12  „  411 
11-14,,  410,444 
11-18  „  372 

12  „  300 

14  „  325 

15  „  326 
15-18  „  444 

16  ,,  414 

18  „  410 

19  „  134,311, 

4U 

19-25  „  446,41.8 

19-31  „  447,449 

20  „  326, 344 

21  „  I.  316 

22  „  411, 467 
22,  29  „  320 

23  „  70 

25  ,,  469 
„      II.  40 

25,  37  „  328 

26  „     I.  294,335, 

382,  386 
26-29  „  308 

26,  29  „  377 
26-31  „          328,377, 

446,  465 

27  „  65, 433 
27,28,30,,     469 

28  „  460 

29  „         299, 307, 

314, 471 
29,  34,  )  ™ 

38,  39  i    "      -^ 

30  „  295, 302, 

m\  344 
.32        „  313 

32,  33  ,,  469 

32,  39  „  450,  451 

34  „  319,3:?2 
,,    II.     45,636 

35  „      I.  3.37 
35-39  „  319 

37  „  217 
37,  38  „  297 

38  „  321 

39  „  450 

xi.     1        „  rJ6,319 


Hebrew.s  (continued). 

xi.     l-3,Vol.I 
1.2,4  „ 
3 


4 

4,5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 

11 
13 

14 
16 
17 

21 

25 

31 

32,33 

33 

a3-40 

31 

35 

37,38 
3'^ 
40 
1 


1-7 

l-xiii 
2 

6-11 

9 
13 
14 

11-17 
15 

15-17 
15-28 
16 
16,  17 

17 

18 

18-21 

18-22 

18,  27 

18-29 

19 

22 

22,  28 

24 


1,2 
1-6 


II. 

I. 

II. 


,p.3l6 
319 

319,455 
467 
.320 
369 
320 
457 

299, 440 
316,319, 

457 
417 

146, 152, 
460 
316 
51 
460 
54 
1.  297 
302 
II.  55 
36 
I.  320,461 
II.  282 
I.  461 
I[.  421 

I.  323,423, 

476 

n.  64 

I.  4W 
319 

299,  319, 
44? 

II.  90 

I.  462,463 
19   446 

300,324, 
335 
325 
297 

294, 464 

4(34 

39 

464,465 

4«4 

II.  530 

I.  377 

471 

464 

308, 328 
294 
II.  40 
I.  316,466 
313 
369 
316 
467 
313 

316,  457 
319 

154,320, 
423,447, 

456 
465 
447 

316,  3,3.5 
316,317, 

318 
448 
298 

341, 449 

299 

II.  .505 

I.  450 

295 


II. 
I. 


QUOTED    OR    REFERRED    TO. 


611 


REWS  (continued).          | 

James  (continued). 

James  (con 

ftnued). 

5,  Vol 

I.,  p.  297 
II.  543 

i.    22,  27,  Vol.  I.,  p.  488 
23        „     II.    20 

iv.     11, 12,  Vol.  II.,  p.  23, 25 
13        ,,             10,  19, 

7       '' 

I.  344 

25 

I.    94,1.56 

23,38 

II.  508 

II.    20,36, 

13,  14  „ 

26 

8       " 

I.  466 

91 

13-17  „ 

25,  ee 

8-16  „ 

471-473 

26,  27  „ 

1.513 

iv.  13-v.  11    „ 

24 

9        , 

I.  344 

II.  24,41 

iv.  14 

20 

10 

164 

ii.    1        ,. 

15,  32, 

16 

66 

11 

411 

96 

17 

26 

12 

302,320, 

1-4    „ 

26 

20 

20 

467 

1-7    „ 

26 

V.     1 

4 

13 

459 

1-13  „ 

23,  24, 

1-6    „ 

1.488 

14        ,, 

299,457, 

52 

II.    12,20, 

470 

2 

17,26 

24,  26, 

15 

159 

5 

1.539 

67,68 

18-23  ,, 

II.  537 

J, 

II.    96 

3 

1.349 

18-24  „ 

I.  298 

5,  13  „ 

19 

3-6     „ 

n.    23 

20 

295,319, 

6,7    „ 

12 

3,8,9 

328 

344 

7 

I.    60 

4 

I.  515 

20-25  , 

476,477 

II.    7,15 

II.    26 

23 

332,310 

8        ',', 

41 

5        ,, 

4 

24 

344 

10 

1.211 

6 

15 

26 

464 

10-26  „ 

II.    26 

7 

15,26 

12 

I.    94 

7.8    „ 

7,68 

James. 

14 

II.    91,98 
79,92 

7-11  „ 
8 

24 
26 

IVol.  II..D.  15.32. 

14-18  „ 

52,53 

10 

26 

36 

14-26  „ 

23,  25, 

11 

26 

1^    , 

24 

26 

12 

17,  19, 

2 
2-4    ' 

36 
I.  129 

15, 16, 1 
19, 20  / 

„    I.  488 

13-15  „ 

24,41 
25 

II.    36, 42 

17 

II.    79 

13-18  ,, 

1.515 

2-16  ', 

26 

17,  26  „ 

98 

, 

II.    24,  26, 

2-18  , 

23 

19 

17,24 

74 

3 

26,  36 

19-26  „ 

54,55 

14 

1.520 

95 

21 

I.  164 

, 

II.    15,  17 

3,  25  , 

26 

II.    20,79 

15 

37,91 

4        , 

26,36 

21-26 ',; 

7 

16 

25, 408 

4  22 

26 
I.     15 

22-26  „ 
23 

96 
93,95 

16-20  , 
17 

25 

272 

,    II.    20,  26, 

24 

79.  89, 

19,  20  , 

24,76 

36,  37, 

99 

20 

1. 129, 170 

42,91 

24,  25  „ 

528 

5-8    , 

,      I.  516 

iii.    1-12  „ 

25,57 

I.  Peter. 

,    II.    24 

1-18  „ 

24,26 

6        ', 

,      I.  235 

2 

1.211 

i.  1— ii.  10,  Vol 

I.,  p.  149 

,    II.     10,  20, 

^ 

II.    36 

i.    1 

129, 146, 

36,  96 

2,3    \, 

41 

149 

6-8    , 

37,  43 

3 

1.154 

,    II.    34,495, 

8-12 

9 

9-11 

20,40 
43 

4 
5 

II.    10 
20 

1,2    , 

517 
,       1.154 

\            24,38 

6 

20 

2 

128, 129, 

10 

,      I.  129 

13 

4 

149,  320, 

II.    20,  45 

13-17  „ 

1.616 

447 

11 

20 

II.    26 

3 

128, 129, 

12 

20,  26, 

13-18  „ 

25 

132,  136, 

'             38 

15 

24 

156,  184 

12-15 

24,  47 

15-17  „ 

37 

,     II.    48 

13 

20 

16 

38 

3-5    \ 

,       I.  154 

13-15 

38,  39 

17 

24 

3-12  , 

149 

14 

,     I.  160,188, 
215 

iv.             „ 
1 

1.518 
II.    60 

4 

131,172 
II.    38 

16-18 

,     II.    24,39, 

1-6    „ 

59,60 

5 

,    I.  126,  128, 

40,  49 

1-10  „ 

25,26 

136, 165, 

17 

I.  471 

1-12  „ 

24 

349 

,    II.     20,  36 

2,3,8, 

1.515 

6 

129. 131, 

18 

,      I.  138,1.54 
,    II.     15,98 

4 

II.    26 

4 

6-9 

132 
1,54,  1.^6 

19 

19,  20 

4,5    „ 

26 

65,  129, 

19-21 

24 

6 

1.129 

132,  136, 

19-25 

40,41 

jj 

II.    20 

147,  188 

19-27 

23 

7        „ 

I.  129 

,     II.    36 

20 

20 

8 

158 

8 

,     I.  127, 128, 

21 

20,  26 

II.    37 

132, 136, 

22 

1.4 

10 

I.  129 

155 

u  n 


612 


PASSAGES    OF    SCRIPTURE 


I.  Peter  (continued). 

i.  9,Vol.  I.,i>pl36,l&l 

10  „  12« 
10, II  „  161 
10-12  „    154, 156, 

213 

11  „     156,212 

12  „    128,129, 

131,133, 
139 
„  II.  40 

13  „   1.129,131, 

132, 136, 
212 
13-16  „     132 
13-17  „     149 
13-21  „     157 

14  „     129,146 

15  „     146 
„  II.   4 

15,  18  „  I.  184 

16  „  146 

17  „  128, 137 

18  „  134,146, 

423 
18-20  „     128 
18-21  „     149 

19  „    131,134, 

184, 189, 
408,424 

20  „      157 

21  „    128,136 

22  „    132, 138, 

211,469 
22-25  „    149,158 

23  „     138 
„  n.  48 

23-25  „   1.  146 

24  „     129 

„  II.  38,45 

25  „   I.  133 

i.  1    „     132,158 
1-10  „     149,159 

2  „    127, 129, 

132 
„  II.  445 

3  „   I.  158 
4-8  „     124 

5  „     145,474 

6  ,,     146 
6-10  „     129 

7  „  128,159 
„  II.  328 

8  „  I.  125 

9  „  128, 129, 

145, 146, 
192, 211, 
466 
„  II.  428 

10  „  I.  128, 146 

11  „    128, 132, 

149, 152 
„  II.  422 
11,  12  „   I.  160 
ii.  11-v.  14  „  149 

12  „    132, 147, 

149 

13  „     58, 129 
13-16  „     125 
13,  14-17  II.  2t7 
13-17  „   I.  149,163 
13-25  „     131 

ii.  13-iii.  7  I.  149 

14  „     137 

15  „    129, 137, 

147 


I.  Peter  (continued). 

ii.  16,  Vol.1.,  p.  144, 216, 
227 

17  „    188 

18  „  129 
18-20  „  149 
18-25  „     164 

19  „     129, 146 

20  „     127, 137 

21  „     135, 139 
21-25  „     149 

22  „     129, 189 
22-25  „     131 

„  II.  73 

23  „   I.  127 

24  „    127, 128, 

134, 156 

25  „    127, 148, 

205 
iii.  1    „    129,130, 
131,201, 
203 
1,2  „     235 
1-6  „     149 
1-7  „     165 
2   „     184 

6  „    137, 145, 

146 

7  „    189,211 
„  II.  61 

8  „   I.  189 
„  II.  73 

8-12  „  I.  149 

8-17  „     167 

8-22  „     168 

iii.  8-iv.  19  „  149 

9  „     129, 147 
9-12  „     131 

10  „     146,147 

11  „     137,464 

13  „    132, 137, 

166, 171 
„  II.  508 
13-17  „   1.  58 
13-18  „     150 

14  „     147 

15  „    132,136, 

166, 167, 
210 

16  „     137, 147 

17  „    131,137, 

147 

18  „    131, 134 
ls»   „     139 
19-22  „     150 

20  „    126, 139, 

167 

21  „    126, 128, 

129, 132, 
138, 184, 
42a, 447 

22  132 

iv.  1   ',',  I-  129.135, 
184 
1-4  „    131,136 
1-6  „     150 

2  „  II.  422,424 

3  „   I.  146, 169, 

184 

4  „    127, 146, 

169 

5  „     128 
5,7  „     155 

6  „    126, 131, 

140, 143, 
171 


I.  Peter  (continved). 

iv.  7,  Vol.  I.,  p.  131 

7-10  „  150 

7-19  „  171 

8   „  125,129 

„  II.  77 

8,  9  „  I.  469 

8,  18  „  188 

10  „  129 

11  „  132 
11-16  „  150 

12  „  65, 147 
12-17  „  171 
12-19  „  58 

13  „  132, 135, 

155 

14  „     60, 132, 

147 

15  „    127,132, 

147, 171 
„  II.  55 

16  „   I.  147 

17  „     65,156 
17-19  „     150 

18  „     146 

19  „     137, 147 
V.  1   „  I.  128, 129, 

130, 131, 
155,205 
„    II.  484,559 
1^    „      I.  150 
1-11  „  173 

2        „  127 

4  „  125, 131, 

139, 155, 
184 

5  „         126, 129, 

146 
„    II.    60 
5-7    „      I.  150 

6  „  131 

8  „  126 

9  „  129,136, 

146 
9-10  „  150 

10  „  131 
10,  11  „  150 

11  „  131 

12  „  127, 133, 

145, 150, 

173, 211, 

477 

13  „  II.  236,487, 

514, 517 
13,  14  „      I.  150 

14  „    II.     76 

II.  Peier. 

i,     IVol.  I.,p.  184,204, 
230 
„  II.    32,33 
1-11  „     I.  210,211 

2  „  188, 231 

3  „  184 
3,5    „  192 

4  „  191, 192 

5  „  184, 185, 

190 
9        „  185, 190 

11  „  185 

12  „  185, 192, 

211 
12-21  „  211-213 

13  „  192 

14  „  184 


QUOTED    OR    REFERRED    TO. 


613 


II.  Peter  (contimied). 
i.    14,Vol.  n.,p.60 


15 

,   I.  192,471 

16 

184, 191 

17   , 

192 

17,  21  , 

204 

19 

190, 192, 

212, 405 

20 

192 

231 

1 

,  II.  337 

1-3  , 

,   I.  190,197 

1-13  , 

204 

1-22  , 

213,216 

3 

185, 190 

4 

167 

4,5  , 

241 

,  II.  521 

5,8 ; 

,   I.  192 

<> 

190 

7   , 

184, 185 

10 

184, 185, 

192, 197 

10,  12, 

) 

13,  15, 

y  „  190 

17 

\ 

12 

184, 197, 

201, 203, 

207, 233 

13 

184, 185 

14 

157, 185 

14,  15 

197 

14,18 

,  II.  39 

16 

,   I.  205 

17 

185 

18 

197 

20 

178, 387 

22 

210 

1 

184 

1-13 

194 

1-18 

216-218 

2 

189 

3 

190, 192, 

197 

3,16, 

17  „  210 

5 

190 

5-7 

216 

7 

185 

8-10 

216 

9 

190 

10 

185, 196 

10-12 

65 

11 

184 

12 

„  II.  328 

14 

„   I.  184 

15 

188,229, 

486 

15,16 

194 

„  II.  528 

16 

„   I.  209 

17 

184, 185 

I.  John. 
i.    1  Vol.  II.,  p.  420 


1,2 

403 

1.4 

402 

2 

460 

3 

412 

4 

497 

5 

40,413 

5-7 

405, 412 

5-10 

413 

6 

98,335, 

385,  413, 

414 

I.  John  (con 

tinued). 

I.  John  (continued). 

i.  7,  Vol.  I 

,  p.  129 

iii.  12,  Vol.  I.,  p.  456 

Ii.  413 

14   „  II.  373,472 

8   ',', 

56, 434 

16   ,,     391 

8-10  „ 

387, 408, 

16-18  „    437,439 

412,413, 

17   „     424 

435 

18   „     420,507 

9 

388 

19,  20  „     441 

ii.  1 

388 

19-24  „     391 

1,2  „ 

409, 410, 

21    „    431,444 

420 

21,  22  „     467 

1,  28  „ 

421 

21-24  „     442 

2 

362 

24   „     431,444 

3 

413, 416 

iii.  24-ir.  6  ,,   444 

3-5  „ 

412, 413 

iv.  1   „  II.  391, 

3-11  „ 

413 

1-3  „     496 

3-14  „ 

412 

1-6  „    379,445 

4 

353, 413 

2   „    391,403, 

5 

355  413, 

449,496 

416 

2,3  „     352 

5,  18  „ 

391 

3   „    423,426, 

6 

453 

449 

6-8  „ 

413 

3,  15  „     352 

6-10  „ 

496 

4   „     420 

6-11  „ 

416 

6,  13  „     391 

7,8  „ 

496 

7-12  „    445,  451 

8 

385,403 

8   „     353,508 

9-11  „ 

386,  413 

9    „   I.  101 

10,  11  „ 

163 

10   „  II.  388,411 

12 

388 

11   „   I.  101 

12-14  „ 

383, 420, 

12   „  II.  403 

421 

13-16  „     453 

13, 14  „ 

391 

14   „     460 

15-17  „ 

26 

16   „     391,414 

15-19  „ 

422,423 

17   „    431,467 

16 

66 

17,18,,    444,453 

18   „ 

I.  3i9,36i 

18   „   I.  137,157 

,, 

II.  328,420 

19   „  II.  454 

18,  22  „ 

352,423, 

19-21  „     455 

496 

V.  1   „     403 

20 

335, 373, 

1-5  „     455 

391 

1,  10  „     352 

20-26  „ 

379 

2   „    391,455 

20-27  „ 

427 

4,5  „     455 

20,  27  „ 

384, 388 

5   „     454,455 

21 

420 

6   „    460,496 

22 

426, 478 

6-8  „     457 

26,  27  „ 

429 

6-9  „     457 

27   „ 

391 

7   „   I.  295 

28 

431, 443, 

9   „  II.  460 

444,496 

9-12  „     464,465 

ii.  28-iii.  3 

„  430, 431 

10   „     460 

29 

363, 391 

10-12  „     457 

iii.  1 

II.  363,387, 

13   „    384,392 

403, 412 

13,  14  „     368 

1-10  „ 

431 

13-17  „    466,467 

2 

114, 489 

14   „     431 

2-5  „ 

363 

15   „     373 

2,  14  „ 

391 

15,  18, )     o„, 
19,  20  /  "  "^^^ 

3 

I.  129,158 

II.  477 

16   „   1.377,387 

3-8  ',' 

431 

„  II.  374,478, 

4,5  „ 

433 

496 

4-10  „ 

387 

18-21  „    477,478 

5,  16  „ 

391 

20    „    335,362, 

6 

433, 509 

403,  467 

6-10  „ 

508 

21   „    379,420 

7,8  „ 

433, 435 

7-10  „ 

I.  231 

II.  John. 

8 

II.  280 

9 

434, 435 

i.   Vol.  II.,  p.  495-497 

9-10  „ 

433 

1   „     507 

10   „ 

435 

1,2  „     420 

10,  11  „ 

501 

1,3  „     494 

10-15  „ 

437 

4   „     494 

11 

4,496 

5,  6  „     495 

G14 


PASSAGES    OF    SCRIPTURE. 


11.  John  (continued). 

ItEVELATioN  (continued). 

Revelation 

(continued). 

i.    5,6,7, 

Vol.II.,p.484 

ii. 

10,  Vol 

I.,  p.  148 

xui.    10,  Vol. 

ri.,p.288 

7 

352, 423, 

^ 

II.    38 

11-17  , 

302 

478 

13 

1.147 

18 

291 

7-9 

495 

14 

215 

xiv.    4        , 

48, 174, 

8 

48.5 

,, 

34-t 

490 

10 

485 

15 

II.  3M 

8 

516 

10,11 

36,495 

20 

I.  215 

14 

114 

r.',  13 

495 

24 

48 

19,  20  , 

212 

13 

486 

,j 

II.  2i5 

20 

261, 317, 

iii 

.    4 

I.  235 

522 

III.  John. 

5 

466 

XV.,  x\'i.            , 

239 

Vol. 

II.,  p.  507-509 

7 

n.  335 

XV.     1 

241 

2 

,       I.  230 

8, 16  „ 

335 

xvi.    5        , 

I.  147 

3 

,     II.  495 

11 

229 

13 

71 

7 

491 

14 

332 

J 

11.266,304 

9 

484 

17 

69 

16 

296 

11 

484 

18 

335 

19 

516 

14 

497 

19 

I.  4<)3 

21 

261 

iv.-vii 

II 

II.  239 

xvii.-xx.           , 

239 

St.  Jude. 

iv 

3 

270 

xvii.,  xviii.       , 

320 

1-25,  Vol 
1 

.  I.,  p.  230-236 

237,485 
,     II.    33 
,       I.  237 

237 

211 
,     n.  522 
,       I.  237 

167, 241 
,     II.  .520 
,       I.  185 
,     II.  522 
,       I.  197, 237 

200 

197,  201 

197,237 
,     II.  521 
,       I.  238 
,     II.    64 
,       I.  241 
,     II.  520 
,       I.  197, 237 

222 

155 

237 

237 

237 

11.467 

,       I.  237 

V 

5 
10 
13 

241 
580 
249, 332 

xvii.             „ 
6 
8 

247 

254 

I.    71 

2 
4 
5 

vi 

4 

214 

8,10,11 

„  II.  284 

9 

I.  148 

9 

291 

jj 

II.  2,54 

9,  10  „ 

241,282 

10 

I.  231, 3t4 

9,  18  „ 

516 

5-7  ; 

6 

7       ', 

vii. 

10,  11  „ 
11 

12        ',', 
1 

II.  522 

I.  148 

II.  271 

231 

241, 256 

10,11  „ 

11 

12 

12,  13, ) 

16,  17  / 

194 
I.    71,77 
11.285 

„      314 

8        ', 
8,23, 

10  , 

11  , 
13 

14 

14,  15  ', 

16        ', 
17,  18  , 
18        , 
19 
20 

viii.-xi 
vii. 

is. 

X. 

xi. 

5-8    „ 
9 

13 

1-5    " 

2 
13 

4 
11 
18 

3 

2 

3 

35 
I.    67 
11.332 
2.54 
239 
546 
241 

232, 265 
256 
296 
259 
241 
287 
74, 270, 

14 
I'i 

18        „ 
xviii.             ,, 

2 

4 

8        „ 

9,  18  „ 
13 
24 

xix.    1        ,, 

6 
11 

332 

282 

285 

67 

266, 516 

162 

I.    65 

171 

443 

148 

II.  33.5 

I.    67 

67 

II.  249, 335 

22, 23  ', 

23 

25        , 

7       „ 
8 

274 
I.    71 
II.  216 

13 
16 

20        „ 

3.32 
332 
303,304 

13 

272 

XX.    2 

295 

Revelation. 

14 
xii.-xiv.          ,, 

229 
2;i9 

4 

I.  148 
II.  187,254 

i.  1-8,  Vol 

II.,  p.  239 

xii.  1-17  „ 

492 

6 

1.474 

4 

241, 296 

3 

I.    17 

9 

n.  261 

.5,6    , 

1.447 

11.241 

10 

304 

6 

129, 159, 

6 

2.59,287 

15        „ 

1.466 

474 

7 

I.  232 

xxi.-xxii.   7     „ 

11.239 

J 

II.  248, 580 

9 

II.  295 

3,4    „ 

1.461 

9 

I.  148 

10 

I.  361 

5 

II.  321 

i.  9-iii.  22  , 

II.  239 

14 

II.  193,287 

9 

492 

12-17  , 

256 

xiii. 

247 

10 

1.457 

15 

270 

1        ',', 

I.    71 

14 

11.  512 

16 

1.368 

3 

77 

16 

321 

ii.    2 

II.  335 

II.  194 

xxii.    7,  9    „ 

335 

3 

335 

5        ',', 

287 

8-21  „ 

240 

5,16, 

229 

6 

I.    71 

11 

50 

6 

344 

8 

466 

15 

335 

9 

I.  148 

II.  445 

18,  19  „ 

1.218 

, 

II.    69 

9,  10  ',', 

288 

20        „ 

11.229 

PASSAGES     FROM    THE     TALMUD 

QUOTED    OR    REFERRED    TO. 


Bbrachoth. 

fol.     5,  a,  Vol.  II.,  p.  Si 

6,  a       „  .3H 

7,  a       „        I.  3S2 

„  II.  311 

8,1      „  I.  -iv: 

8,  h       „  418 
13,!)        „  n.    83 

20,  b  „  50 
29, a  „  I.  326 
32,  a  ,,  378 
63,  b  ,,  469 

Peah  (Mishnah). 
cb.  ii.  6,     Vol.  I.,  p.  433 

Shabbath. 

fol.    21,a,  Vol.  I.,p.  3^7 

32,  a  „  II.     74 

5.5,  b  „  I.  .363 

56,  b  „  II.  282 

57,  a  „  84 
86,  a  „  85 
88, b  „  I.  466 
89,  a  „  311 

Pesachim. 

fo'.    54,  o.  Vol.  I.,  p.  311 
57,  a       „  409 

„      II.     11,  13, 
14 
113,  a       „  551 

113,  b        „        I.  501. 
„      II.  199 

Chagigah  (Mishxah). 
ch.  ii.4,    Vol.  I.,  p.  409 

MOED  Katon. 
fol.    26,  n.  Vol.  II.,  p.  328 

KosH  Hashanah. 

fol.    16,  n,  Vol.  I.,  p.  432 
16,  h       „  4.32 

21,  b       „  3  J3 

23,  o       „      II.  199,257 


YOMA. 

fol.      2,  a,  Vol.  I.,  p.  408, 43t 


5,  b 

428 

9,  a 

327 

',      II- 

13 

9,  b 

323 

14,  b 

',        I. 

433 

18.  a,  h 

43t 

19,  a 

327 

19,  b 

431 

20,  a 

433 

20,  b 

435 

23,  a 

'    n. 

85 

28,  b 

91 

29,  b 

435 

35,  b 

!    n' 

«;=;i 

.38,  a 

2.54 

41,(1 

409 

',    II- 

515 

52,  b 

418 

66,  a 

435 

66,  b 

',      IT. 

552 

85,  b 

432 

86,  a 

432 

86,  b 

',   II. 

78 

87,  a 

77 

YoMA  (Mishnah). 
ch.iii.  7,  Vol.  II.,  p.  547 


4 

7 

V.  2 

vii.  2 

viii.  9 


I.  420 
437 

419, 422 
422 
441 


YOMA  (Tosapoth). 
ch.  i.      Vol.  I.,  p.  551 

SOCCAH. 

fol.  29,  6,  Vol.  II.,  p.  68 
51, b  „  I.  254 
55,  b       „  431,433, 

439 

Taanith. 

fol.      3,  b.  Vol.  II.,  p.  81 
5,  a       „  321 


Megillah. 

fol.  6,a,  Vol.II.,p.201 
9,  a  „  I.  261 
14  b  ,  II.  94 
23,  a       „        I.  432 

Yevamoth. 

fol.    16,  b.  Vol.  II., p.  31 

49,  b       „        I.  363,461 
62, 63     ,,  501 

63,  b        „  517 

86,  b        „  403 

Kethuboth. 

fol.  103,  b.  Vol.  I.,  p.  432 
104,  a       „  418 

KlODUSHIN. 

fol.    29,  b.  Vol.  I.,  p.  .504 
70,  b       „  3;7 

„      II.     13 
82,  a       „  81, 94 


GiTTIN. 


fol.     7,  a 
57,  a 


I.  .327 
II.  213 


Nedaeim. 

fol.  31,  b,  Vol.  II.,  p.  81 
32,  b  „  I.  399 
38,  a       „  418 

40, a       „      II.     74 
64,  b       „        I.  504 

S0T4H. 

fol.    47,  b,  Vol.  II.,  p.  85 

Bava  Kama. 
fol.  113,  b,  Vol.II.,p.l99 

Bava  Metzia. 

fol.    .59,  b,  Vol.  I.,  p.  5.37 

85,  rt       „  215 

„      II.  173 

86,  a       „  311 


616 


PASSAGES  FROM  THE  BOOK  OF  ENOCH. 


fol. 


Bava  Bathra. 

I., p.  418 

II.  321 

I.  353 

II.  321 

I.  501. 

432 


14,  a,  Vol 

25,  o 

7.5,  a 

75,  b 
116,  o 
121,  a 


Avodah-Zakah. 

fol.  3,  a,  Vol.  I.,  p.  311 
18,  b,  „  II.  476 
27,  b  „  I.  508 
44.  b       „      11.  163 


Sanhedrin. 

fol.    37,  a,  Vol.  II.,  p.  77 

59,  a  „  199 

64,  a  ,,  409 

81,  b  „  T.  327,431 

89,  h  „  II.    93 

90,  b  „  81 
99,  a  „  I.  366 

100,  b       „  517 

103.  b       „  460 

110,  b        „       II.    31 


Shevdoth. 
fol.    13,a,  Vol.  I.,p.432 

Maccoth. 
fol.    23,  b,  1  TT  1   T       J  CI 

AvoTH  (Mishnah). 

ch.  i.  10.  Vol.  II.,  p.  56 

17  „               54 

iv.  15  „               52 

V.  21  .,         I.  511 

AvOTH  DE  R.  Nathan. 
ch.  xxxix..  Vol.  II.,  p.  472 

SOPHRIM. 

ch.  XV.,  Vol.  II.,  p.  199 

Gerim. 
ch.  i.,  Vol.  II.,  p.  81 


Menacuoth. 

fol.  29,  a.  Vol.  I.,  p.  317 
99.  b       .,  258 

Mexachoth  (Tosepta). 
Vol.  II.,  p.  11 

Bechoroth. 
fol.      4,  a.  Vol.  I.,  p.  404 

CUULLIN. 

fol.    90,  b.  Vol.  I.,  p.  415 

Kerithoth. 

fol.  7,a.Vol.  I..P.  432 
28,  a  „  II.  14 
28,  b       „  551 

MiDDOTH. 

ch.  V.  2,  Vol.11.,  p.  547 


PASSAGES    FROM    THE    BOOK    OF    ENOCH 

QUOTED    OR    REFERRED    TO. 


Vol.  I.,  p.  2.31  et  seq. 

„  240  et  sc<7. 

Vol.  II.,  p.  258 

i.-xxxv.      „       518,5i;0 

i.-vi.  12      ,,  518 

i.  6      „     I.        217 

i.  8      .,  232 

vi.  4      „  232 

vii-x.      „  II.       518 

vii.  2      „  521 

X.  1-y      „  521 

xi.-xvi.      ,.  518 

iii.-xvi.      ,,    I.       234 

xii.  4      „  231 

5-7      „  241 

„  II.       621 


xiv.  4  Vol.  II.,  p.  521 

5  „  I.  231 
XV.  1-7      „  II.  522 

3      „  I.  231 

xvi.  5      „  II.  521 

xvii.-xxxv.      ,,  518 

xviii.  13      „  266 

14,16      „  I.  241 

„  II.  522 

xxi.  3      „  I.  241 

„  II.  266 

6  „  521 
10      „  I.  231 

xxxvii.-lxx.      „  11.518,520 

xxxviii.-xliv.      ,,  518 

xl.  8      ,.  I.  232 


xli.  1,  Vol.  I.,  p.  232 

xlv.-lv.  „  II.  518 

xlv.  2  „  232 

liii.  8  „     I.  241 

liv.  6  „  II.  521 

Ivi.-lxx.  „  518 

Ixxi.-cv.  „  520 

Ixxi.-lxsxi.  ,,  519 

Ixxxii.-lxssix.     ,,  519 

xc,  xci.  ,,  519 

scii.  1-18  „  519 

xcii.  19-civ.  ,,  519 

xcviii.  3  „  317 

Civ.  1-3  „  255 

cv.  „  519 


Date  Due 


D  J 


^  oie'W' 


